Antitrust intake that captures measurable harm up front
The intake asks whether competitors coordinated on price or bids, whether your business suffered measurable harm, and whether the conduct falls within the last four years — with room to upload contracts, correspondence, or pricing records that support the claim.
The exact intake your antitrust litigation leads complete
This is the real 7-question guided intake for Antitrust Litigation — the same flow your customers finish before you ever pick up the phone.
What a qualified antitrust litigation lead should tell you
Claims that a business has been harmed by anticompetitive conduct in a market — such as competitors colluding on price or bids, or a dominant company using exclusionary tactics — as opposed to a single-party contract dispute.
- Business Owner, Company Decision-Maker,
- Problem Related Competition In
- Believe Two Or More
- Believe Powerful Company May
- Business Suffered Measurable Harm
- Any Conduct And Harm
- Identify At Least One
The questions your team needs answered
Every antitrust litigation intake asks these — and why each one matters.
| Question | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Are you a business owner, company decision-maker, or authorized representative seeking help for a business (not a personal consumer-only issue)? | Confirms the submitter has standing to bring a business claim, filtering out personal consumer-only issues that aren't an antitrust fit. |
| Is the problem related to competition in a market (for example, prices, bids, suppliers, customers, or access to sell), not just a contract dispute with one company? | Separates genuine market-competition problems from a dispute with a single company, which belongs in a contract or commercial litigation matter instead. |
| Do you believe two or more competing companies may have worked together to fix prices, rig bids, divide customers/territories, or limit supply? | Identifies suspected coordination among competitors, the core fact pattern behind price-fixing and bid-rigging claims. |
| Do you believe a powerful company may be using unfair tactics to block competitors (for example, forcing exclusivity, cutting off key suppliers, or threatening customers) and harming your business? | Flags a different theory — exclusionary conduct by a single dominant firm — which requires distinct analysis from collusion among competitors. |
| Has your business suffered measurable harm (such as lost sales, higher costs, lost customers, or being pushed out of a market) because of this conduct? | Measurable financial harm is what turns a suspicion of anticompetitive conduct into a claim with real damages to pursue. |
| Did any of the conduct and harm happen within the last 4 years (or is it still ongoing today)? | Recent or ongoing conduct matters for timing considerations, so older conduct is flagged for lower priority without a legal determination. |
| Can you identify at least one company involved (by name) and the product/service and location where it happened in the United States? | Being able to name a specific company, product, and location signals a concrete, investigable fact pattern rather than a vague suspicion. |
How Cliont scores antitrust litigation leads
Every answer is weighted automatically — no manual review required.
Value signals
- Business Owner, Company Decision-Maker,: yes
- Problem Related Competition In: yes
- Believe Two Or More: yes
- Believe Powerful Company May: yes
- Business Suffered Measurable Harm: yes
- Any Conduct And Harm: yes
See the lead your team receives
Antitrust Litigation Lead
From first click to qualified lead
Follow people and businesses seeking counsel through one smooth, guided flow.
They land & meet you
Your video greeting plays instantly — a real face instead of a blank form.
They explain the matter
Smart questions adapt to their matter and capture the full scope.
They share the documents
The facts, dates, and any paperwork come attached, so you can assess the matter before the consultation.
You get a ready lead
Scored and qualified — waiting for you to win it.
Built for antitrust litigation workflows
| Cliont capability | Antitrust Litigation application |
|---|---|
| Conditional branching | Routes leads describing a single-company contract dispute (no market-wide competition issue) away from the antitrust track so they don't consume consultation time meant for genuine competition matters. |
| Weighted lead scoring | Weights suspected collusion, exclusionary conduct, and measurable harm most heavily, so a lead alleging coordinated bid-rigging with real financial harm scores well above a vague competitor complaint. |
| Document upload capture | Collects contracts, bid records, pricing communications, or financial records at intake so you have early evidence of the alleged conduct and harm before the first conversation. |
| CRM lead routing | Sends the completed antitrust intake — including whether a specific company and location have been identified — directly to your CRM, flagging any missing company details for follow-up. |
Common antitrust litigation lead scenarios
Suspected bid-rigging among competitors
A contractor suspects several competitors coordinated on public bids and lost work as a result — collusion, harm, and recent timing all score highest here.
Dominant supplier cutting off access
A distributor believes a powerful supplier forced exclusivity or cut off inventory to block them from a market, a distinct exclusionary-conduct pattern the intake tracks separately from collusion.
Single-vendor contract dispute
A caller describes a pricing disagreement with one supplier and no market-wide competition issue — the intake flags this as a lower-fit match for a contract or commercial dispute matter instead.
Conduct that ended years ago
A business owner describes pricing conduct that stopped more than four years back with no ongoing harm, which the intake scores lower given the timing signal.
No company named yet
A prospective client suspects coordinated pricing but cannot yet name a specific competitor or transaction, so the lead is captured but flagged for more detail before a consultation is booked.
Connect Cliont to your workflow
Send leads
HubSpot, HighLevel, Salesforce, JobNimbus
Book matters
Google Calendar, Outlook Calendar, Calendly
Notify your team
Email, SMS, Slack
Automate follow-up
Zapier, Webhooks, API
Simple, transparent pricing
Choose the plan that works for your business.
Professional
Unlimited intake forms and leads for your growing business.
- Unlimited intake forms
- Custom video greetings
- AI-powered voice bot
- English + Spanish support
- Automatic lead scoring
- Digital estimates & e-signatures
- Photo, video & file upload
- Advanced analytics dashboard
Pay Per Lead
Only pay when you receive a qualified lead.
- Unlimited intake forms
- Custom video greetings
- AI-powered voice bot
- English + Spanish support
- Automatic lead scoring
- Digital estimates & e-signatures
- Photo, video & file upload
- Charged only for submitted leads
More business and corporate law intake templates
Antitrust Litigation lead-intake FAQs
How does the intake tell an antitrust matter apart from a routine contract dispute?
One question asks whether the issue involves market-wide competition — pricing, bids, suppliers, or access to sell — rather than a dispute with a single company, so contract-only matters can be routed elsewhere before they reach you.
Can the intake separate collusion between competitors from one dominant company acting alone?
Yes, the catalog asks separately about suspected coordination among competitors and about a single powerful company using exclusionary tactics, so you can see immediately which pattern the lead describes — useful given siblings like Cartel and Price-Fixing Investigations and Monopolization Defense cover related but distinct conduct.
What happens if the prospective client can't name the company involved?
The intake still captures the lead but records that no company or location has been identified yet, which lowers the score slightly and tells you the matter needs more detail before it's consultation-ready.
Does the intake check whether the conduct is too old to act on?
It asks whether the conduct and harm occurred within the last four years or are ongoing, which flags older, likely time-barred conduct for lower priority without making a legal determination for you.
What if the person submitting isn't actually authorized to act for the business?
The first question confirms the submitter is a business owner, decision-maker, or authorized representative, filtering out personal consumer-only issues that aren't a fit for antitrust litigation work.
Where do qualified antitrust leads end up?
Qualified leads with their full answer set and any uploaded documents are sent directly to your CRM so your team can review the fact pattern before offering a consultation.
Turn antitrust litigation visitors into qualified cases
Give every antitrust litigation visitor a guided intake instead of a dead contact form — and get a scored, qualified lead before you book a consultation.