JUDGMENT

JAMES V. SELNA, District Judge.

This action came on for trial on March 15, 2016, in Courtroom 10C of the above-entitled Court, the Honorable James V. Selna, United States District Judge, presiding. Plaintiffs Trendsettah USA, Inc. and Trend Settah, Inc. ("Plaintiffs") appeared by their attorneys, Mark Poe, Randolph Gaw, and Victor Meng of Gaw | Poe LLP, and Defendant Swisher International, Inc. ("Defendant") appeared by its attorneys, Michael Marsh, Ryan Roman, Kimberly Lopez, and Jennifer Glasser of Akerman, LLP.

A jury of seven persons was impaneled and sworn to try the action. After an eight-day trial and after deliberations, the jury returned a Special Verdict in favor of Plaintiffs Trendsettah USA, Inc. and Trend Settah, Inc. ("Plaintiffs"), and against Defendant Swisher International, Inc. ("Defendant"), on each of the four causes of action tried: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (3) violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act by creating or maintaining a monopoly through anti-competitive practices; and (4) violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act by attempting to create or maintain a monopoly through anti-competitive practices. On Plaintiffs' claims for breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, the jury awarded $9,062,679.00. On Plaintiffs' claims for monopoly and attempted monopoly under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, the jury awarded $14,815,494.00. The contents of the jury's Special Verdict, which was filed on March 30, 2016, is hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth fully herein.

Based upon the jury's Special Verdict, the Court NOW ENTERS JUDGMENT AS FOLLOWS:

1. Judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendant on all of Plaintiffs' claims so tried before the jury;

2. As to Plaintiffs' claim for violation of Florida Antitrust Law, Fla. Stat. § 542.19, judgment is entered in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiffs;

3. Pursuant to a stipulation made on the record by the parties, because the amount of the antitrust damages exceeds the amount of the contract damages awarded by the jury, the contract damages are reduced to zero;

4. Plaintiffs shall recover the antitrust damages awarded by the jury, which is automatically trebled to $44,446,482.00 pursuant to Section 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 15(a); and

5. Post-judgment interest shall run on this judgment in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1961.

6. As the prevailing parties, Plaintiffs shall recover their costs and reasonable attorney fees from Defendant to the extent ordered by the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED