Practice Areas

Antitrust, Commodities, Securities Fraud, and Consumer Fraud

Lovell Stewart Halebian Jacobson LLP has obtained, as sole lead counsel or co-lead counsel, the largest class action settlement in the history of each of three federal statutes.  See In re NASDAQ Market-Makers Antitrust Litig., 187 F.R.D. 465, 471 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) ("this all-cash settlement [for $1,027,000,000], achieved through 'four years of hard-fought litigation,' apparently is the largest recovery (class action or otherwise) in the hundred year history of the state and federal antitrust laws."); In re Sumitomo Copper Litig., 74 F. Supp.2d 393, 395 (S.D.N.Y. 1999) ("The recovery is the largest class action recovery in the 75 plus year history of the Commodity Exchange Act"); Blatt v. Merrill Lynch Fenner & Smith, Inc., 94 Civ. 2348 (JAG) (D.N.J.) ("by far the largest settlement" of class action claims under the Investment Company Act, Securities Class Action Alert letter dated August 17, 2000).

            In each of the foregoing cases, claiming class members received 100% of their actual damages.

            With regard to antitrust experience, the Firm has prosecuted the following notable cases:

            (1)  The Firm is one of the very few firms to try and to win a verdict on claims for price-fixing in violation of the antitrust laws in a Federal Court in New York.  Strobl v. New York Mercantile Exchange, 582 F. Supp. 770 (S.D.N.Y. 1984), aff'd, 768 F.2d 22 (2d cir. 1985) (after the Department of Justice decided not to bring price-fixing claims under the federal antitrust laws, and after the Commodity Futures Trading Commission lost a trial seeking to prove manipulation, the Firm tried and won claims for price-fixing and manipulation in a three week jury trial before the Honorable Lloyd F. MacMahon).  Although there are many other law firms that have done plaintiffs' work in antitrust cases, there are very few (if any) besides this Firm that have tried and won a price-fixing case in a New York Federal Court.

            (2)  In re NASDAQ Market-Makers Antitrust Litig., 187 F.R.D. 455, 471 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) (the Firm filed the first case and was appointed one of four co-lead counsel in these claims for price-fixing which resulted in the largest class action settlement (up to that time) in the history of the antitrust laws; according to plaintiffs' experts and due to the absence of any reversionary terms in the settlement agreements, this settlement produced a pay-out to class members, after deducting all attorneys' fees and costs, that equaled their single (non-trebled damages)).  Again, although there are many law firms that have experience in prosecuting antitrust class actions, very few have secured settlements that achieved a return for the class members, after payment of all attorneys' fees and costs have been deducted, of 100 cents on the dollar for their single (non-trebled) damages.

            (3)  Billing v. Credit Suisse First Boston, Ltd., et al., ("Initial Public Offering Antitrust Litigation"), No. 01 Civ.  2014 (WHP) (S.D.N.Y.) (the Firm was appointed Chairman of co-lead counsel to prosecute claims for price-fixing in violation of the antitrust laws).  See also Billing v. Credit Suisse First Boston Ltd., 426 F.3d 130, 136 (2d cir. 2005) ("epic Wall Street conspiracy"); petition for certiorari filed March 8, 2006; see "J.P. Morgan Agrees To Settle IPO Case," The Wall Street Journal, April 12, 2006, at C-4 (announcing signing of Memorandum of Understanding to settle this action and numerous related actions against one of the twelve defendants for $425,000,000.  See regarding the argument to the U.S. Supreme Court.

            (4)  In re Auction Houses Antitrust Litig., No. 00 Civ. 0648 (LAK) (S.D.N.Y.) (as interim co-lead counsel, the Firm prepared the successful class motion and reply papers, winning certification of price-fixing claims in violation of the antitrust laws which later resulted in a settlement of $512,000,000).

            (5)  Dennison v. BP Products North America, Inc. ("Propane Antitrust"), No. 06 C 3541 (N.D.Ill.) (the Firm has been appointed chairman of co-lead counsel on these claims alleging manipulation and price-fixing in violation of the antitrust laws).

            (6)  In re Brand Name Prescription Drugs Antitrust Litigation, No. 94 C 897 (N.D.Ill.) (attorneys in the firm served on the Executive Committee and performed extensive work on claims alleging price-fixing in violation of antitrust laws and resulting in settlement of $696,667,000 in cash, together with additional benefits, which constituted the second largest class action settlement to that point in the history of the federal antitrust laws).

            (7)  Leider v. Ralfe, No. 01 Civ. 3137 (S.D.N.Y., transferred to D.N.J.) (the Firm filed the first action alleging price-fixing and monopolization by DeBeers in the diamond market in violation of the antitrust laws, prosecuted the case through the conclusion of evidentiary hearing before settlement and was reached, and serves as one of the class counsel; proposed settlement for $250,000,000 and extensive injunctive relief (that is already in effect) resulted on these claims).

            (8)  In re Microsoft Corp. Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 1332 (D.Md.) (the Firm was appointed co-lead counsel in this extremely complex antitrust litigation which resulted in a partial settlement of the federal claims and many partial settlements of the state antitrust claims).  The Firm persistently represented the class and the interests of prospective class members for seven years, including extensive involvement in discovery and preparation for trial (a settlement averted trial) and acting as sole appeal counsel for the class or prospective class members in two separate appeals to the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.  Kloth v. Microsoft Corp., 444 F.3d 312 (4th Cir. 2006); In re Microsoft Corp. Antitrust Litig., 355 F.3d 322 (4th Cir. 2004).

            (9)  In re Dynamic Random Access Memory ("DRAM") Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 1486 (N.D.Cal.) (the Firm was appointed to the Executive Committee on these class action claims alleging price-fixing of computer memory in violation of the federal antitrust laws and have resulted, so far, in settlements of in excess of $313,000,000).