Amicus "Friend of the Court" Briefs
2003 to Present
This page provides links to some of the legal briefs that SIFMA has submitted in various court actions.
Questions? Contact Kevin Carroll
Case Name and Court (and hyperlinks to brief and press release, if any) |
Date Filed |
Amicus Issue |
Counsel of Record |
Other Amici |
|---|---|---|---|---|
In re Enron Creditors Recovery Corp. U.S. Bankruptcy Court, |
5/6/08 |
Whether Enron may avoid and recover, as preferences or fraudulent conveyances, various pre-petition payments made by Enron in connection with the repurchase, prior to maturity, of certain of Enron’s outstanding commercial paper in the period preceding Enron’s voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. |
Allen & Overy LLP Joshua Cohn |
None. |
| Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York | 5/5/08 |
Whether an injunction designed to prevent the merger of JP Morgan and Bear Stearns would harm the public interest because a collapse of Bear Stearns would have severe negative consequences for the nation’s financial markets and the economy as a whole. |
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP Tariq Mundiya Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP Richard D. Bernstein |
None. |
|
Appeals Court, |
3/26/08 |
Whether subprime adjustable rate mortgage loans whose financing terms and conditions, documentation, disclosure, securitization, and sale were all plainly permitted under state and federal law may nevertheless be found to be violative of a Massachusetts consumer protection statute. |
Thacher Proffitt & Wood LLP Richard F. Hans |
American Securitization Forum |
Pachter v. Bernard Hodes Group Court of Appeals, |
3/7/08 |
Whether, in the absence of a governing agreement, commissions are “earned” and therefore considered “wages” under sections 191 and 193, thereby rendering most subsequent deductions unlawful. |
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP Samuel S. Shaulson |
None |
American Isuzu Motors v. Ntsebeza, Digwamaje, Khulamani, et al. U.S. Supreme Court |
2/11/08 |
Whether financial services firms, by engaging in their ordinary business in South Africa, in a manner consistent with applicable law and encouraged by their home countries pursuant to policies of constructive economic engagement, aided and abetted the apartheid regime in violation of the Alien Tort Statute. | Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP Thomas C. Rice |
The Clearing House Association |
|
U.S. Court of Appeals (Second Circuit) |
1/22/08 |
Whether the Department of Justice’s now-repudiated policy of taking a firm’s advancement of attorneys’ fees into account in deciding whether the firm adequately cooperated with a criminal investigation wrongfully interfered with employees’ lawful access to independent legal advice, and improperly undermined employers’ well-established right to advance fees to individuals who face legal jeopardy as a result of doing their jobs. |
Clifford Chance US LLP Clifford Chance US LLP |
None. |
American Home Mortgage v. CSFB |
10/12/07 |
Whether and the extent to which a mortgage loan master repurchase agreement, inclusive of the mortgage servicing provisions, is a “repurchase agreement” as defined in §101(47) of the Bankruptcy Code and therefore, covered by the safe harbor provisions of Bankruptcy Code §559. |
Teitelbaum & Baskin, LLP Jay Teitelbaum
|
None. |
|
Florida Supreme Court |
9/17/07 |
Whether bonds payable through tax increment financing (TIFs), and certain other obligations payable from ad valorem taxes, such as certificates of participation (COPs), are subject to the referendum requirements of article VII, section 12, of Florida’s Constitution. |
Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge LLP One North Clematis Street Elaine Johnson James |
None. |
| Stoneridge v. Scientific –Atlanta and Motorola U.S. Supreme Court |
8/15/07 |
Whether conduct by secondary actors may give rise to primary liability under Section 10(b) of the 1934 Act and Rule 10b-5 under a “scheme to defraud” liability theory. | O’Melveny & Myers LLP 1625 Eye Street, N.W. Walter Dellinger O’Melveny & Myers LLP 7 Times Square Jonathan Rosenberg | Futures Industry Association |
|
U.S. Bankruptcy Court (S.D.NY) | 8/7/07 | Whether Rule 2019(a) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure applies to the members of ad hoc committees, who represent only their own interests and who are not fiduciaries for other stakeholders, such that they would be forced to disclose highly confidential and proprietary information.
| Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 399 Park Avenue Andrew N. Goldman | Loan Syndications and Trading Association
|
|
U.S. Supreme Court | 7/19/07 | Whether Kentucky’s income tax scheme violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution because it exempts from tax the interest earned by its residents on in-state municipal bonds, but taxes the interest earned by its residents on out-of-state municipal bonds. | Sidley Austin LLP Carter Phillips Sidley Austin LLP 787 Seventh Avenue A. Robert Pietrzak | None. |
UBS Financial Services and Kurrasch v. Gibson Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York
| 7/16/07 | Whether NASD arbitrators have power to recommend expungement of CRD records pursuant to NASD Rule 2130 in light of the State of New York’s alleged property interest in those records, and state recordkeeping regulations. | Bingham McCutchen LLP 2020 K Street, NW Paul J. Lambert | None. |
|
U.S. Court of Appeals (Second Circuit)
| 7/12/07 | Whether foreign plaintiffs may sue foreign companies for foreign conduct under U.S. securities laws.
| Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP One Liberty Plaza Deborah M. Buell | U.S. Chamber of Commerce U.S. Council for International Business The Association Française Des Enterprises Privées |
Mary Ellen Kay v. Loretta Abrams Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York
| 6/13/07 | Whether NASD arbitrators have power to recommend expungement of CRD records pursuant to NASD Rule 2130 in light of the State of New York’s alleged property interest in those records, and state recordkeeping regulations.
| Bingham McCutchen LLP 2020 K Street, NW Paul J. Lambert | None. |
|
U.S. Bankruptcy Court (W.D.PA) | 6/12/07 | Whether Rule 2019(a) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure applies to the members of ad hoc committees, who represent only their own interests and who are not fiduciaries for other stakeholders, such that they would be forced to disclose highly confidential and proprietary information.
| Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 399 Park Avenue Andrew N. Goldman | Loan Syndications and Trading Association
|
FIA Card Services, fka MBNA America Bank v. Tax Commissioner of the State of West Virginia U.S. Supreme Court
| 5/8/07 | Whether West Virginia may impose income and franchise taxes on a bank with no physical presence in West Virginia.
| Sullivan & Cromwell LLP 125 Broad Street Richard J. Urowsky | The Clearing House Association National Foreign Trade Council Organization for International Investment U.S. Council for International Business |
Gredd v. Bear, Stearns Securities Corp. U.S. District Court | 5/7/07 | Whether deposits into a customer’s own account with a securities broker are voidable under the Bankruptcy Code as fraudulent transfers, and whether a financial institution that credits deposits to an accountholder thereby becomes an “initial transferee” of those deposits. | Dickstein Shapiro LLP 1825 Eye Street, NW Howard Schiffman | None.
|
|
U.S. Bankruptcy Court (S.D. TX)
| 4/9/07 | Whether Rule 2019(a) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure applies to the members of ad hoc committees, who represent only their own interests and who are not fiduciaries for other stakeholders, such that they would be forced to disclose highly confidential and proprietary information.
| Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP 1 Chase Manhattan Plaza Matthew S. Barr | Loan Syndications and Trading Association
|
|
Court of Common Pleas, Cuyahoga County, Ohio |
3/28/07 |
Whether an injunction imposed by a State on a finance company may include provisions that restrict or delay the company's ability to service and foreclose on delinquent mortgage loans or create an administrative oversight function pursuant to which the State or its designee will assist in determining whether, when and how delinquent loans will be serviced and foreclosed. |
Squire, Sanders & Dempsey L.L.P. 4900 Key Tower Martha S. Sullivan |
None. |
|
U.S. Court of Appeals (Federal Circuit)
| 3/21/07 | Whether, once notice arises of another’s patent rights, an accused infringer should bear the burden and cost to retain a competent legal opinion to provide a basis for reasonable reliance on the advice of counsel as a defense to willful patent infringement. | Dilworth Paxson LLP 3200 Mellon Bank Center Thomas S. Beimer | The Financial Services Roundtable
|
|
U.S. Court of Appeals (Ninth Circuit)
| 3/20/07 | Whether the Federal Arbitration Act permits state law to hold unenforceable an otherwise-valid arbitration agreement simply because one party did not specifically call the arbitration clause to the other’s attention. | Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP 355 S. Grand Avenue, 35th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 George M. Garvey | None. |
|
U.S. Bankruptcy Court (S.D. NY)
| 3/15/07 | Whether Rule 2019(a) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure requires members of ad hoc committees and other entities acting as groups in Chapter 11 cases to file with the court a verified statement disclosing, among other things, “the amounts of claims or interest owned by…the members of the committee…the times when acquired, the amounts paid therefore, and any sales or other dispositions thereof.”
| Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP 1 Chase Manhattan Plaza Matthew S. Barr | Loan Syndications and Trading Association
|
|
U.S. District Court
| 3/12/07 | Whether equitable subordination under Section 510(c) and disallowance under Section 502(d) can be applied, as a matter of law, to claims held by a transferee to the same extent they would be applied if such claims were still held by the transferor. | Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Seth P. Waxman Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 399 Park Ave James H. Millar | International Swaps and Derivatives Association Loan Syndications and Trading Association
|
Millowitz v. Citigroup Global Markets U.S. Court of Appeals (Second Circuit)
| 1/30/07 | Whether the rationale for applying the “fraud on the market” doctrine to issuer misstatements also applies to research analyst reports, and whether the Court should extend the Basic v. Levinson, 485 U.S. 228 (1988), presumption of reliance to research analyst reports, thereby subjecting research analysts and their firms to suits by large classes of investors, many of whom may not have been aware of the analyst’s opinions.
| Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP 1909 K Street, NW Andrew J. Pincus Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP 71 South Wacker Drive Stephen M. Shapiro | None. |
Teamsters Local 445 v. Dynex Capital U.S. Court of Appeals (Second Circuit)
| 1/17/07 | Whether plaintiffs bringing claims for securities fraud may allege scienter on the part of a corporate defendant (corporate/collective scienter) without pleading scienter against any particular employee, where management made public statements contradicted by facts known only to lower-level employees.
| Sidley Austin LLP 1501 K Street, NW Carter G. Phillips 787 Seventh Avenue A. Robert Pietrzak | U.S. Chamber of Commerce The Business Roundtable |
Regents of the University of California v. Credit Suisse First Boston U.S. Court of Appeals (Fifth Circuit) | 12/13/06 | Whether conduct by secondary actors may give rise to primary liability under Section 10(b) of the 1934 Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.
| Irell & Manella LLP 1800 Avenue of the Stars David Siegel | The Clearing House Association |
|
Court of Appeals,
| 12/7/06 | Whether a firm that files a Form U5 enjoys absolute or qualified immunity from defamation suits arising out of statements made on the form. | Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP 666 Fifth Ave. Michael Delikat | None. |
Tellabs v. Makor Issues & Rights
U.S. Supreme Court
| 12/6/06 | Whether the 7th Circuit’s “could infer” test satisfies the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act’s heightened pleading standard which requires plaintiffs bringing claims for securities fraud to plead “with particularity” facts that give rise to a “strong inference” of scienter.
| Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP 71 South Wacker Drive Stephen M. Shapiro Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP 700 Louisiana Street J. Brett Busby | U.S. Chamber of Commerce
|
In re Enron Corp. Securities, Derivative and ERISA litigation U.S. Court of Appeals (Fifth Circuit) |
7/26/06 |
Whether an implied cause of action exist under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 against a secondary actor such as a bank, which has made no misrepresentations and has no duty of public disclosure, on the purported ground that such secondary actors engaged in transactions with an issuer of securities, which the issuer later misreported. |
Irell & Manella LLP 1800 Avenue of the Stars Suite 900 David Siegel |
The Clearing House Association |
Financial Security Assurance v. Stephens Financial Security Assurance v. Stephens U.S. Court of Appeals (Eleventh Circuit) |
6/21/06
5.11.05 |
Whether a financial guaranty insurer has standing to assert a claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C §78j(b) and Rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. §240.10b-5, as a “purchaser” of the bonds it has insured. |
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 101 Park Avenue John M. Vassos |
None. |
|
U.S. District Court |
5/4/06 |
Whether the Department of Justice Internal Policy Guidelines for charging corporations (the “Thompson Memorandum”), which treats “a corporation’s promise of support to culpable employees and agents … through the advancing of attorneys fees” as a potential basis for finding that the corporation itself has failed to “cooperat[e]” with a government investigation, violates key criminal justice principles, and threatens the integrity of the employment relationship and efficient corporate operations. |
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington DC 20006 Howard M. Shapiro |
U.S. Chamber of Commerce Association of Corporate Counsel |
|
U.S. Supreme Court |
4/16/06 |
Whether federal antitrust laws are impliedly repealed as to the conduct of underwriters in initial public offerings (IPOs) such that underwriters are immune from lawsuits brought under the federal antitrust laws involving the pricing of IPOs. |
Robbins, Russell, Englert, Orseck & Untereiner LLP 1801 K Street, NW Roy T. Englert Jr. |
U.S. Chamber of Commerce |
|
U.S. Supreme Court |
3/28/06 |
Whether the court of appeals properly exercised appellate jurisdiction to review the district court’s remand order, when the remand order was the result of a substantive decision rejecting a federal statutory preemption defense to certain securities fraud class actions available under the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (SLUSA). |
Sidley Austin LLP 1501 K Street, NW Carter G. Phillips |
None. |
eBay and Half.com v. MercExchange U.S. Supreme Court |
1/26/06 |
Whether the Federal Circuit erred in setting forth a general rule in patent cases that a district court must issue a permanent injunction upon a finding of infringement, absent exceptional circumstances. |
Bingham McCutchen LLP Three Embarcadero Center W. Hardy Callcott |
Futures Industry Association Financial Services Roundtable |
|
U.S. Bankruptcy Court (S.D. NY) |
1/19/06 |
Whether, under Section 510(c) of the Bankruptcy Code, a court may subordinate the claim of an innocent purchaser of a bankruptcy claim for value and without notice of any wrongdoing by a previous holder, if the seller or previous holder committed an unrelated bad act against the debtor or its creditors. |
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 2445 M Street, NW Louis R. Cohen Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 399 Park Avenue James H. Millar |
International Swaps and Derivatives Association Loan Syndications and Trading Association |
|
U.S. Court of Appeals (First Circuit) |
1/11/06 |
Whether conduct by secondary actors may give rise to primary liability under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 after the Supreme Court’s decision in Central Bank of Denver v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, 511 U.S. 164 (1994). |
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP 125 Broad Street David H. Braff |
U.S. Chamber of Commerce The Clearing House Association |
Superadio v. Walt “Baby” Love Productions Commonwealth of Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court |
11/30/05 |
Whether a lawyer licensed to practice and in good standing in another U.S. jurisdiction engages in the unauthorized practice of law by appearing in arbitration proceedings held in Massachusetts. |
Bingham McCutchen LLP 150 Federal Street Timothy P. Burke |
None. |
Pierce County v. State of Washington Pierce County v. State of Washington Supreme Court of the State of Washington |
11/17/05
|
Whether Initiative No. I-776, which repealed certain taxes and fees that were pledged as security to repay municipal bonds, violates Article I, Section 23, of the Washington State Constitution as it applies to those municipal bonds. |
Koegen Edwards LLP 1001 Fourth Avenue Roy J. Koegan |
None. |
|
U.S. Supreme Court |
11/14/05 |
Whether the preemption provision of the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA), which bars class actions based upon state law that allege “a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact in connection with the purchase or sale of a covered security,” applies to securities class actions by persons who allege they held securities in reliance upon a misrepresentation or omission about a covered security. |
Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP 1501 K Street, NW Carter G. Phillips |
None. |
|
U.S. Bankruptcy Court (S.D. NY) |
9/23/05 |
Whether certain pre-petition payments made in connection with certain over-the-counter equity derivatives transactions may be avoided and recovered, as preferences and/or fraudulent conveyances, consistent with the safe harbor provisions set forth in Sections 546(e) and (g) of the Bankruptcy Code. |
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 2445 M Street, NW William J. Perlstein |
International Swaps and Derivatives Association |
Enron Corp. v. Credit Suisse First Boston U.S. Bankruptcy Court (S.D. NY) |
9/21/05 |
Whether certain pre-petition payments made in connection with certain over-the-counter equity derivatives transactions may be avoided and recovered, as preferences and/or fraudulent conveyances, consistent with the safe harbor provisions set forth in Sections 546(e) and (g) of the Bankruptcy Code. |
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 2445 M Street, NW William J. Perlstein |
International Swaps and Derivatives Association |
Enron Corp. v. Lehman Brothers U.S. Bankruptcy Court (S.D. NY) |
9/21/05 |
Whether certain pre-petition payments made in connection with certain over-the-counter equity derivatives transactions may be avoided and recovered, as preferences and/or fraudulent conveyances, consistent with the safe harbor provisions set forth in Sections 546(e) and (g) of the Bankruptcy Code. |
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 2445 M Street, NW William J. Perlstein |
International Swaps and Derivatives Association |
|
U.S. Bankruptcy Court (S.D. NY) |
7/5/05 |
Whether pre-petition payments made in connection with certain over-the-counter equity derivatives transactions may be avoided and recovered, as preferences and/or fraudulent conveyances, consistent with the safe harbor provisions set forth in Sections 546(e) and (g) of the Bankruptcy Code. |
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 2445 M Street, NW William J. Perlstein |
International Swaps and Derivatives Association |
|
U.S. Supreme Court |
5/16/05 |
Whether the preemption provision of the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA) applies to state-law class actions by securities holders who claim that they refrained from selling securities in reliance on a misrepresentation. |
Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP 1501 K Street, NW Carter G. Phillips |
None. |
|
U.S. Court of Appeals (Second Circuit) |
2/15/05 |
Whether plaintiffs satisfied the class action certification standard in a research analyst case. |
Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP 190 S. Lasalle Street Stephen M. Shapiro |
None. |
|
U.S. Court of Appeals (Ninth Circuit) |
12/21/04 |
Whether conduct by secondary actors may give rise to primary liability under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 after the Supreme Court’s decision in Central Bank of Denver v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, 511 U.S. 164 (1994). |
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP 125 Broad Street David H. Braff |
U.S. Chamber of Commerce The Clearing House Association |
In re Worldcom Securities Litigation U.S. District Court |
10/1/04 |
Whether an underwriter should be required to perform the same due diligence for a shelf offering as it would for an offering involving a pre-effective waiting period. |
Davis Polk & Wardwell 450 Lexington Avenue Robert F. Wise, Jr. |
None. |
Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo U.S. Supreme Court |
9/13/04 |
Whether a plaintiff bringing a civil claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 need only allege and show that he paid an inflated price for the security because of a misrepresentation, or must also allege and show that revelation of the misrepresentation or omission caused a decline in price. |
Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP 1501 K Street, NW Carter G. Phillips |
None. |
American Bankers Association v. Lockyer U.S. Court of Appeals (Ninth Circuit) |
8/9/04 |
Whether the provisions of California’s Financial Information Privacy Act that regulate the sharing of information with affiliates are preempted by the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act and its 2003 amendments. |
Alston & Bird LLP 601 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20004 Thomas M. Boyd Alston & Bird LLP 1201 W. Peachtree St. William H. Jordan |
Investment Company Institute Investment Counsel Association of America American Insurance Association American Council of Life Insurers National Business Coalition on E-Commerce and Privacy |
Jevne v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County Supreme Court of the State of California |
7/21/04 |
Whether California’s arbitration standards are preempted by federal law. |
Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP 355 South Grand Ave., 35 th Fl. Marc T.G. Dworsky |
None. |
EBCI, f/k/a eToys. v. Goldman Sachs Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division EBCI, f/k/a eToys v. Goldman Sachs Court of Appeals, |
7/9/04 |
Whether an underwriter owes a fiduciary duty to an issuer with respect to the price of an initial public offering (IPO). |
Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton One Liberty Plaza Mitchell A. Lowenthal |
None. |
Royal Indemnity Company v. MBIA Insurance U.S. Court of Appeals (Third Circuit) |
6/2/04 |
Whether Royal Indemnity Company failed to honor its payment obligations in a timely manner under certain insurance policies that it issued insuring the payment of principal and interest in the event of a default on certain, specified student loans. |
Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP 10 S. Dearborn Street Robert D. Aicher |
American Securitization Forum |
|
U.S. Court of Appeals (Second Circuit) |
3/23/04 |
Whether plaintiffs satisfied the class action certification standard in a research analyst case. |
Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP 190 S. LaSalle Street Stephen M. Shapiro |
None. |
|
U.S. Bankruptcy Court |
3/17/04 |
Whether Enron’s repurchase of its commercial paper qualifies as protected settlement payments that fall within the safe harbor provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. |
Allen & Overy 1221 Avenue of the Americas Daniel P. Cunningham |
None. |
|
U.S. Bankruptcy Court (S.D. NY) |
3/17/04 |
Whether payment made under over-the-counter (OTC) equity derivatives contracts are protected by Sections 546(e) and (g) of the Bankruptcy Code from preference and fraudulent conveyance actions. |
Wilmer Cutler Pickering LLP 2445 M Street, NW William J. Perlstein |
International Swaps and Derivatives Association |
California Public Employees’ Retirement System v. Bobbitt U.S. Court of Appeals (Second Circuit) |
2/12/04 |
Whether claims under the Securities Act of 1933 can be removed to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1452, the bankruptcy removal statute. |
Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton One Liberty Plaza Lewis J. Liman |
None. |
Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo U.S. Supreme Court |
2/4/04 |
Whether the Ninth Circuit applied the proper test for establishing “loss causation” in a securities fraud case. |
Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP 1501 K Street, NW Carter G. Phillips |
None. |
|
U.S. Court of Appeals (Ninth Circuit) |
1/30/04 |
Whether a party may cooperate with a government investigation by voluntarily disclosing work product without waiving the privilege as to other third parties under the “selective waiver doctrine.” |
Latham & Watkins LLP 633 W. Fifth Street, Suite 4000 James J. Farrell |
None. |
McKesson HBOC v. The Superior Court of San Francisco County Court of Appeal for the State of California |
11/17/03 |
Whether a company may cooperate with a government investigation without risking waiver of the work product privilege as to other third parties under the “selective waiver doctrine.” |
Latham & Watkins LLP 633 W. Fifth Street, Suite 4000 James J. Farrell |
None. |
Knorr-Bremse Systeme Fuer Nutzfahrzeuge GMBH v. Dana Corp. U.S. Court of Appeals (Federal Circuit) |
11/3/03 |
Whether the adverse inference rule hinders the ability of persons threatened with a claim of patent infringement to engage in full and frank discussion with their counsel in the course of obtaining a favorable written legal opinion because of the fear that these privileged communications will have to be disclosed in order to avoid a negative inference in a subsequent willful infringement action. |
Dilworth Paxson LLP 3200 Mellon Bank Center Steven L. Friedman |
None. |
|
U.S. Court of Appeals (Second Circuit) |
10/10/03 |
Whether claims under the Securities Act of 1933 can be removed to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1452, the bankruptcy removal statute. |
Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton One Liberty Plaza Lewis J. Liman |
None. |
Marsh v. Prudential Securities Court of Appeals of the State of New York |
8/27/03 |
Whether the practice of contingent incentive compensation is in contravention of the New York Labor Law. |
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP 1285 Avenue of the Americas Brad S. Karp |
None. |
MCA Financial Corp. v. Paine Webber U.S. Bankruptcy Court (E.D. MI) |
7/16/03 |
Whether final payments made in connection with whole loan repossession transactions are protected under the “forward contract” safe harbor of the Bankruptcy Code. Because the case was settled, the brief was never filed. |
Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C. 150 West Jefferson, Suite 2500 Donald J. Hutchinson Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton One Liberty Plaza Seth Grosshandler |
None. |
|
U.S. Court of Appeals (Ninth Circuit) |
6/5/03 |
Whether a company may cooperate with a government investigation without risking waiver of the work product privilege as to other third parties under the “selective waiver doctrine.” |
Latham & Watkins LLP 633 W. Fifth Street, Suite 4000 James J. Farrell |
None. |
Nuveen and Strong v. Morgan Keegan U.S. Court of Appeals |
4/17/03 |
Whether a state law modeled after the Uniform Securities Act should apply to an offer to sell securities that was neither “made in” nor “directed” to the state. |
Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP 787 Seventh Avenue A. Robert Pietrzak Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP 1501 K St., NW Joseph R. Guerra |
None. |
Mayor of the City of New York v. Council of the City of New York Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York |
3/28/03 |
Whether New York City Local Law Number 36 is preempted by the New York State Banking Law and regulations, and should be enjoined from taking effect. |
Thacher Profitt & Wood 11 West 42 nd Street Kevin J. Plunkett |
None. |
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps LLP U.S. Court of Appeals (Ninth Circuit) |
3/21/03 |
Whether arbitration of statutory employment claims pursuant to predispute arbitration agreements is appropriate and often superior to litigation. |
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP Old Federal Reserve Bank Bldg. Michael Delikat |
None. |
No. 84 Employer-Teamster Joint Council Pension Trust Fund v. America West Holding Corp. U.S. Court of Appeals (Ninth Circuit) |
3/13/03 |
Whether the absence of any market reaction to a disclosure in the form of a stock price drop is fatal to a plaintiff invoking “fraud-on-the-market” to establish reliance and materiality as elements of their Section 10(b) claim. |
Latham & Watkins LLP 505 Mongomery St., Suite 1900 Latham & Watkins LLP 11955 Freedom Drive Laurie B. Smilan |
None. |
New York City Employees’ Retirement System v. Ebbers U.S. District Court |
1/17/03 |
Whether the court may properly assert federal “related to” jurisdiction under Section 1334(b) of the Judicial Code where the defendant underwriters had contribution or indemnity rights against a bankrupt issuer. |
Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton One Liberty Plaza Jennifer L. Kroman |
None. |