Baker & Miller has the smallest US antitrust practice in the GCR 100, and is one of the most specialised. Six out of its eight lawyers focus on antitrust law. Highly regarded senior partner Donald Baker was formerly assistant attorney general at the DoJ’s antitrust division. Both he and fellow partner Todd Miller are Who’s Who nominees.
Baker & Miller PLLC
|Global heads: Donald Baker and Todd Miller|
|Home jurisdiction: USA|
|Total size of firm: 8|
|No. of competition lawyers: 6|
|% of firm specialised: 75|
|Who’s Who nominees: 2|
|Equity partners: 1|
|No. of lateral partner hires: 0|
|No. of partner departures: 0|
|No. of internal promotions: 0|
As a boutique, Baker & Miller handles all types of antitrust cases, working with a diverse range of clients. This year, for example, it represented Australian airline Qantas in the high-profile air-cargo criminal investigation, which saw Qantas accused of fixing the price of fuel surcharges on cargo flights.
In late November, Qantas agreed to pay a US$61 million fine. Baker & Miller is also advising Qantas in related civil litigation. The Georgetown-based firm also represented the Dairy Farmers for America in resolution of the Southern Belle litigation matter, another highly publicised case.
This year also saw Baker & Miller advise the New York brokerage firm Cantor Fitzgerald on antitrust issues arising from setting up a new trading platform; a UK currency trading firm on issues of access to a market platform; and the British Embassy in Washington, DC on competition and jurisdictional matters. It also filed an amicus brief to the DoJ on behalf of long-standing client the US Newspaper Guild.
On the merger front, Baker & Miller advised US healthcare company Horizon Health on its acquisition by Psychiatric Solutions. The deal was cleared by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
The firm also advised the British and Australian governments in relation to human rights claims brought by Papua New Guinea against UK mining group Rio Tinto in 2000. Baker & Miller was asked to provide counsel because certain jurisdictional issues had parallels to antitrust law.