Legal Opinion
United States v. Stanley
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 7, 2012No. 11 Civ. 6875 (WHP)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
WILLIAM H. PAULEY III, District Judge.
Plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) moves pursuant to section 2(b) of the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act (the “Tunney Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 16(b)-(h), for entry of a final judgment (the “Consent Decree”) settling its antitrust claim against Defendant Morgan Stanley. The Government represents that this case is its first attempt to obtain disgorgement from a financial services firm that used derivative agreements to facilitate anticompetitive behavior. For the following reasons, the Government’s motion for entry of…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- United States v. Microsoft Corporation. United States of America v. Microsoft CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1995
- Wegoland Ltd. v. NYNEX Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- Massachusetts v. Microsoft Corp.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2004
- United States Securities & Exchange Commission v. Citigroup Global Markets Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2012
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Simon v. Keyspan CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2012
- Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Sprint Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 2017