Opinion ID: 3011036
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Is the Evidence in the Aggregate Sufficient to

Text: Prove Causation in Fact? At all events, we are satisfied that Seidel's report, as well as Sullivan's, in conjunction with the customer evidence discussed above, constitutes sufficient evidence of causation. In Stelwagon, we noted that there was no admissible evidence that the plaintiffs had suffered injuries attributable to the defendants' price discrimination. See Stelwagon, 63 F.3d at 1275. We therefore held that the expert's report was not sufficient evidence of causation and loss. Here, by contrast, there is direct evidence-- i.e., the plaintiffs' testimony about their customers' behavior -- that identifies customers whom the plaintiffs lost as a result of the defendants' actions. See supra section III.A. Furthermore, there is evidence -- the customers' hearsay statements, which are admissible under Rule 803(3), in addition to the expert reports -- of the reasons for such loss. Thus, the plaintiffs have adduced evidence of specific lost transactions showing causation or fact of injury, which is bolstered by an expert damage report that is not overly speculative as a matter of law. Rossi, 156 F.3d at 487. We conclude that all of this evidence taken together defeats the defendants' motion for summary judgment on the ground that the plaintiffs have not adduced sufficient evidence of fact of damage on their antitrust claims.14 Accordingly, we _________________________________________________________________ 14. The defendants offer as an alternative ground for affirming the dismissal of the plaintiffs' antitrust claim that the plaintiffs have failed to show that they suffered an antitrust injury. Since we have declined to consider whether the plaintiffs have offered sufficient evidence of antitrust violations at the present time, we will also refrain from considering the defendants' contention that the plaintiffs cannot prove an antitrust injury. See supra Part II. 39 will reverse the District Court's grant of summary judgment on the antitrust claims, and remand for further proceedings.