Banks Agree to $337M Settlement in Price-Fixing Case
The proposed settlement must still be approved by U.S. District Judge Jed. S. Rakoff, who has been overseeing the case in Manhattan.
December 17, 2019 at 06:47 PM
4 minute read
Thirteen of the nation's largest banks have agreed to pay a combined $337 million to settle a lawsuit by the Pennsylvania Treasury Department and a contingent of government agencies and pensions funds claiming that they had conspired to fix the price of bonds issued by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other government-sponsored entities.
If approved, it would bring total settlements in the private antitrust litigation to $386.5 million, following previous agreements with three other banks.
On Tuesday, Pennsylvania Treasurer Joe Torsella announced the proposed settlement, which has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Under the terms of two separate agreements, Barclays Capital Inc., which underwrote most of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bonds, would pay $87 million, and the remaining 12 defendants agreed to a $250 million payment to the plaintiffs.
All 13 banks, Torsella said, had also agreed to a series of antitrust reforms, including enhanced training, oversight and a compliance program subject to periodic assessment by the state treasury department.
"In addition to a financial recovery, my focus in this case has been and remains reforming the government-sponsored entity bond market, to which most public investors are exposed, so that this conduct is not only corrected, but that it is prevented," Torsella said in a statement.
"As a result, some of the largest banks in the nation—for the first time—will implement strong antitrust compliance measures to do just that."
The proposed settlement must still be approved by U.S. District Judge Jed. S. Rakoff, who has been overseeing the case in Manhattan.
Filed in March, the lawsuit accused 16 prominent financial institutions of colluding to fix prices of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bonds between 2009 and 2016, and cited more than a dozen online chatrooms traders used to set artificial prices before bringing the bonds to market.
Torsella, who was named class representative earlier this year, also decried a pervasive lack of oversight at the financial institutions, which allowed for violations of U.S. antitrust law. In addition to monetary recovery, Torsella sought structural reforms to prevent anti-competitive conduct in the future.
"The allegations in this case were preventable from the start. If the proper safeguards were in place at these banks, we wouldn't need to be here knocking the door down on behalf of investors who were harmed by the banks' conduct," he said.
In a court filing late Monday, Torsella said the preliminary settlement was in line with earlier court-approved agreements to resolve claims against Deutsche Bank, FTN and Goldman Sachs. Each of the 13 banks would be required to implement compliance programs consistent with principles drafted by the Pennsylvania Treasury, and would have to meet annually with department officials, starting two years after the settlement goes into effect.
The banks have all denied any wrongdoing.
The 12 banks responsible for the $250 million payment under the proposed settlements include BNP Paribas, Cantor Fitzgerald, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, HSBC, JPMorgan, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Morgan Stanley, Nomura, Societe Generale, TD Securities and UBS.
The case is captioned In re GSE Bonds Antitrust Litigation.
Read More:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBank of America's Cash Sweep Program Attracts New Legal Fire in Class Action
3 minute readUS Judge Rejects Morgan Stanley Reconsideration Bid in Deferred Compensation Litigation
SEC Under Trump 2.0 Likely to Take More 'Measured' Enforcement Approach, Observers Say
New Cybersecurity Regulations are Here. This Is What You Need to Know.
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1How to Support Law Firm Profitability: Train Partners Up
- 2Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 3Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 4Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 5X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250