Photo of Thomas D. Nevins

Thomas D. Nevins

San Francisco
T: 415.434.9100
F: 415.434.3947


  • J.D., University of California, Berkeley, 1983
  • A.B., University of California, Berkeley, 1975
Publications & News

Thomas Nevins is an attorney in the Antitrust and Competition Practice Group in the firm's San Francisco office.

Areas of Practice

Mr. Nevins specializes in complex business litigation, with an emphasis in antitrust, price discrimination, and unfair competition. Prior to joining Sheppard Mullin, Mr. Nevins was an associate and partner at Broad, Schulz, Larson & Wineberg, San Francisco (1983-1994).

Representative Litigation Cases

Reilly v. The Hearst Corporation, 107 F.Supp.2d 1192 (N.D. Cal. 2000) (acquisition challenged under the Clayton Act and Sherman Act);

Pan Asia Venture Capital Corporation v. The Hearst Corporation, et al., 74 Cal.App.4th 424 (1999) (alleged pricing below cost under California Business and Professions Code 17043);

City of Long Beach v. Standard Oil Co. of California, 46 F.3d 929 (9th Cir. 1995), and 872 F.2d 1401 (9th Cir.), modified, 886 F.2d 246 (9th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1076 (1990) (alleged price fixing and conspiracy to monopolize);

Tominaga v. Shepherd, 682 F.Supp. 1489 (C.D. Cal. 1988) (alleged group boycott, refusal deal and tying);

Northern California Booksellers Association v. The Hearst Corporation, United States District Court for Northern District of California (alleged secondary line price discrimination under Robinson-Patman Act 2(a));

Harris v. Duty Free Shoppers Limited Partnership, 940 F.2d 1272 (9th Cir. 1991) (alleged secret rebates under Robinson-Patman Act 2(c));

Western Shoe Gallery, Inc. v. Duty Free Shoppers Ltd., 593 F.Supp. 348 (N.D. Cal. 1984) (alleged secret rebates under Robinson-Patman Act 2(c));

Tomizaki v. Duty Fee Shoppers Ltd., San Francisco Superior Court (alleged secret rebates under California Business & Professions Code 17045);

Frontier Enterprises, Inc. v. Amador Stage Lines, Inc., 1985-2 Trade Cas. (CCH)  66,827 (E.D. Cal. 1985) (alleged sham litigation and price squeeze under Sherman Act 01 and 2).


Antitrust Law Blog Posts

  • Member, American Bar Association (Antitrust and Litigation sections)
  • Member, State Bar of California
  • Member, Bar Association of San Francisco