Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 18 APRIL 2016

Will Antitrust Cases Relating To Securities Transactions Invite More Objections Because Of Their Complexity?

Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
Explore more from Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.

The deadline for parties to object to the settlement in the In re Credit Default Swaps Antitrust Litigation in the Southern District of New York recently passed on February 29, 2016.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The deadline for parties to object to the settlement in the In re Credit Default Swaps Antitrust Litigation, Master Docket No. 13-MD-2476 (DLC) in the Southern District of New York recently passed on February 29, 2016. Unlike in most cases, where parties typically only object to settlements to the extent they allocate attorneys' fees, several potential settlement class members to this litigation ("CDS Litigation") have made specific, substantive objections to the potential distribution of settlement funds. In class plaintiffs' ("Plaintiffs" or "Class Plaintiffs") memo of law in support of approval of the settlement, Plaintiffs responded forcefully to these objections. Although Judge Denise Cote has yet to decide whether to approve the settlement, it is worth examining these new objections, which may suggest a trend in class-action settlement objections—at least in antitrust cases relating to securities transactions—moving forward. In addition, Plaintiffs' heavy

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from