Credit Suisse Sec. (USA) LLC v. Billing

From Conservapedia
This is the current revision of Credit Suisse Sec. (USA) LLC v. Billing as edited by FernoKlump (Talk | contribs) at 22:22, 28 April 2008. This URL is a permanent link to this version of this page.

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

In Credit Suisse Sec. (USA) LLC v. Billing, 127 S. Ct. 2383 (2007), a 7-1 U.S. Supreme Court held that the securities laws implicitly preclude an action brought under the antitrust laws asserted by a group of buyers of newly issued securities against underwriting firms that market and distribute those issues.

The buyers claim that the underwriters unlawfully agreed with one another that they would not sell shares of a popular new issue to a buyer unless that buyer committed (1) to buy additional shares of that security later at escalating prices (a practice called "laddering"), (2) to pay unusually high commissions on subsequent security purchases from the underwriters, or (3) to purchase from the underwriters other less desirable securities (a practice called "tying").

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the decision for the Court, and Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a dissent based on the original meaning of the statutes. Justice Antonin Scalia, perhaps surprisingly, did not join Justice Thomas's dissent.