Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP Logo
  • Practices
  • People
  • Careers
  • News
  • Practices
  • People
  • Careers
  • News
  • Our Story
  • The Cravath System
  • Diversity & Inclusion
  • Pro Bono
  • Alumni
  • 200.Cravath

Four Decades for Justice

Read More

People

Michael A.
Paskin

Partner, Litigation

mpaskin@cravath.com
  • New York+1-212-474-1760
    • E-mail
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • LinkedIn
  • PDF
  • Vcard
  • Overview
  • Credentials
  • Featured Work

Michael A. Paskin focuses his practice on class actions and other complex litigation, primarily in the areas of antitrust, securities, contracts and general commercial disputes, and financial reorganization and restructuring. He has represented many leading financial institutions, including Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Westpac, in matters involving complex financial markets and products such as residential mortgage-backed securities, stock loans, credit default swaps, interest rate swaps and other derivatives, as well as loan syndication and interest rate benchmarks. Mr. Paskin also has represented corporate clients in various industries, including Akorn, Big Lots, Beazer Homes, Bombardier, Cummins, IBM, Lucent Technologies, Sprint and YPF S.A. In addition, he represents corporations and boards of directors in connection with internal investigations and inquiries by U.S. and foreign regulators, including the SEC, DOJ, CFTC and European Commission.

Praised as a “true star,” Mr. Paskin has been recommended by The Legal 500 US for his work in the financial services, general commercial, corporate restructuring, antitrust and securities litigation practice areas.  Benchmark Litigation has also recognized him as one of the “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America,” a “National Star” in general commercial and antitrust litigation and a “Local Litigation Star” in New York. Lawdragon has consistently selected Mr. Paskin as one of the “500 Leading Lawyers in America,” and has named him to its “500 Leading Litigators in America” list. He has additionally been recognized by The Best Lawyers in America and Super Lawyers for his litigation work. 

Mr. Paskin was featured as “Litigator of the Week” in The AmLaw Litigation Daily for representing the Republic of Argentina in litigation arising from its $80 billion sovereign debt default in 2001. After being retained as new counsel in February 2016, Mr. Paskin led a team that obtained the vacatur, first in the Southern District of New York and then on an expedited Second Circuit appeal, of extraordinary injunctions that had previously blocked Argentina’s access to the international capital markets. Mr. Paskin’s work for Argentina was also recognized in the Financial Times North America Innovative Lawyers report and received a “National Impact Case Award” from Benchmark Litigation.

Mr. Paskin’s other notable representations include:

Antitrust

  • New Mexico State Investment Council v. Bank of America Corp., et al. (D.N.M.):  Representing Morgan Stanley in a class action against leading CDS dealers, alleging a conspiracy to manipulate the auction process used to value CDS contracts at settlement. 
  • In re Interest Rate Swaps Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.):  Representing Morgan Stanley in a class action alleging dealers conspired to block exchange trading of IRS, as well as a related CFTC investigation.
  • Iowa Public Employees’ Retirement System, et al. v. Bank of America Corporation, et al. (S.D.N.Y.):  Representing Morgan Stanley in a class action alleging that prime brokers conspired to block anonymous peer-to-peer trading platforms for securities lending. 
  • SL-x IP S.á.r.l. v. Bank of America Corporation, et al.:  Won dismissal of all claims brought by the operator of a purported electronic stock loan trading platform, alleging a conspiracy by Morgan Stanley and several other major banks to boycott SL-x. Mr. Paskin continues to represent Morgan Stanley on appeal.
  • Tera Group, Inc., et al. v. Citigroup, Inc., et al. (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Morgan Stanley in an action alleging that CDS dealers conspired to block competing trading platforms.
  • Bank Bill Swap Rate (BBSW) Litigation (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Westpac in a class action alleging manipulation of the Australian BBSW benchmark.  
  • In re Credit Default Swaps Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Morgan Stanley in a class action alleging a conspiracy to block exchange trading of CDS. Mr. Paskin also advised Morgan Stanley in related DOJ and European Commission inquiries.
  • In re Aftermarket Filters Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Ill.):  Represented Cummins Filtration Inc. in a class action alleging price fixing in the market for automotive replacement filters.
  • Represented IBM in connection with the contested termination of a 1956 DOJ antitrust consent decree, as well as a DOJ antitrust investigation into agreements between IBM and Storage Technology Corporation.

Securities

  • Representing a preeminent investment bank in matters relating to the collapse of Archegos Capital Management.
  • JPMorgan RMBS Litigations:  Represented JPMorgan and related entities—including WaMu and Bear Stearns—in RMBS investor actions. In In re Washington Mutual Mortgage Backed Securities Litigation (W.D. Wash.), Mr. Paskin won a decision limiting RMBS class claims based on tranche‑level standing, eliminating claims covering $7.5 billion in securities. In Dexia SA/NV, et al. v. Bear, Stearns & Co., et al. (S.D.N.Y. and N.Y. Sup. Ct.), Mr. Paskin won summary judgment in federal court covering certificates worth over $1.5 billion.
  • Willis v. Big Lots, Inc., et al. and In re Big Lots, Inc. Shareholder Litigation (S.D. Ohio):  Represented Big Lots in securities and derivative litigation alleging insider trading and misstatements regarding the company’s performance and prospects. Mr. Paskin also represented Big Lots in related SEC and U.S. Attorney investigations.
  • In re Chemed Corp. Securities Litigation (S.D. Ohio) and In re Chemed Corp., Shareholder Derivative Litigation (D. Del.):  Represented Chemed and individual defendants in class action securities and shareholder derivative litigation.
  • Lentsch v. Vista Outdoor Inc., et al. (D. Utah):  Represented Vista Outdoor in a securities class action related to alleged misrepresentations about the company’s performance and goodwill impairments.
  • State of New Jersey and its Division of Investment v. Sprint Corporation, et al. (D. Kan.):  Won summary judgment in a securities class action alleging misstatements concerning employment contracts with Sprint’s former CEO and President. Mr. Paskin also represented Sprint in shareholder litigation in Kansas state court related to the recombination of Sprint’s FON and PCS “tracking stocks.”
  • In re Beazer Homes USA, Inc. Securities Litigation (N.D. Ga.):  Represented Beazer in securities and derivative litigation alleging improper mortgage origination practices and accounting improprieties designed to obscure the impact of the declining housing market.
  • Represented Lucent Technologies in one of the largest securities class actions in history (D.N.J.), and related federal and state securities, derivative, whistleblower and bankruptcy litigation and SEC and U.S. Attorney investigations.

Contracts and General Commercial Litigation

  • Antara Capital Master Fund LP et al. v. Bombardier Inc. et al. (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):  Representing Bombardier in a bondholder action alleging that recent divestitures constituted a breach of certain covenants in Bombardier’s indentures, and seeking to invalidate default waivers obtained through a consent solicitation. 
  • Loomis Sayles Trust Co. v. Citigroup Global Markets (S.D.N.Y.): Representing Citigroup in putative class action litigation asserting contract and fiduciary duty claims for alleged failure to achieve “best execution” in equity trades.
  • United Natural Foods, Inc. v. Goldman Sachs (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):  Won dismissal (and affirmance on appeal) of breach of contract and fraud action brought against Goldman Sachs by its former client United Natural Foods, Inc. (“UNFI”) relating to the syndication of financing for UNFI’s $3 billion acquisition of SuperValu in 2018.
  • Akorn, Inc. v. Fresenius Kabi AG, et al. (Del. Ch. and Del.):  Represented Akorn in litigation regarding Fresenius’s termination of a $4.3 billion merger agreement. After expedited proceedings, the case culminated in a one-week bench trial in July 2018 and subsequent expedited appeal.  It is one of a handful of cases regarding termination rights arising from material adverse event (“MAE”) provisions to be tried to a decision, and the first such appeal decided by the Supreme Court of Delaware.
  • Petersen Energía Inversora v. Argentine Republic and YPF S.A. and Eton Park Capital Management v. Argentine Republic and YPF S.A. (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented YPF against claims by minority shareholders arising out of Argentina’s 2012 expropriation of a controlling stake in YPF.
  • Morgan Stanley v. Discover Financial Services (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):  Won partial summary judgment for Morgan Stanley in a breach of contract action based on Discover’s refusal to pay a special dividend of approximately $800 million.
  • IBM v. Lexmark (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented IBM in a contract action relating to the sale of IBM’s printer business. The case culminated in a two‑week bench trial and judgment for IBM in excess of $55 million.

Financial Reorganization & Restructuring

  • Moby S.p.A. v. Morgan Stanley, et al. (N.Y. Sup.), Moby S.p.A. v. Morgan Stanley, et al. (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.), and In re Moby S.p.A. (Bankr. S.D. Fla.):  Won the dismissal of litigation filed against Morgan Stanley by Moby S.p.A., alleging that Morgan Stanley tortiously interfered with Moby’s restructuring proceedings in Italy.  He continues to represent Morgan Stanley in related chapter 15 bankruptcy proceedings filed by Moby.
  • In re Energy Futures Holdings Corp., et al. (Bankr. D. Del.):  Conflicts counsel to Energy Future Intermediate Holdings Company LLC in connection with the $49 billion bankruptcy of the largest electricity utility in Texas.
  • In re Tribune Company, et al. (Bankr. D. Del.):  Represented various affiliates of both Dimensional Fund Advisors and Goldman Sachs in connection with adversary proceedings and other litigation related to the Tribune bankruptcy.
  • In re Tronox Incorporated (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Credit Suisse, JPMorgan and other secured lenders in an adversary proceeding that sought to avoid transfers and obligations under a $200 million secured debt facility.
  • Represented Lucent in an adversary proceeding (Bankr. D. Del.) brought by the chapter 7 trustee of Winstar Communications, culminating in a 21‑day bench trial.

Mr. Paskin also maintains an active pro bono practice, which in recent years has involved matters related to voting rights and ballot access, the right to shelter for homeless families in New York City, and claims of racial discrimination.

Mr. Paskin was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He received a B.A. cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania in 1992 and a J.D. from Fordham School of Law in 1995, where he was a member of the Law Review. Following graduation, Mr. Paskin served as a law clerk to Hon. Paul J. Kelly, Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. He is a member of the International Bar Association, American Bar Association and New York City Bar Association.

Mr. Paskin joined Cravath in 1996 and was elected a partner in 2002. He served as the Litigation Hiring Partner from 2016 to 2020 and was a member of the Diversity Committee.

Praised as a “true star,” Mr. Paskin has been recommended by The Legal 500 US for his work in the financial services, general commercial, corporate restructuring, antitrust and securities litigation practice areas.  Benchmark Litigation has also recognized him as one of the “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America,” a “National Star” in general commercial and antitrust litigation and a “Local Litigation Star” in New York. Lawdragon has consistently selected Mr. Paskin as one of the “500 Leading Lawyers in America,” and has named him to its “500 Leading Litigators in America” list. He has additionally been recognized by The Best Lawyers in America and Super Lawyers for his litigation work. 

Mr. Paskin was featured as “Litigator of the Week” in The AmLaw Litigation Daily for representing the Republic of Argentina in litigation arising from its $80 billion sovereign debt default in 2001. After being retained as new counsel in February 2016, Mr. Paskin led a team that obtained the vacatur, first in the Southern District of New York and then on an expedited Second Circuit appeal, of extraordinary injunctions that had previously blocked Argentina’s access to the international capital markets. Mr. Paskin’s work for Argentina was also recognized in the Financial Times North America Innovative Lawyers report and received a “National Impact Case Award” from Benchmark Litigation.

Mr. Paskin’s other notable representations include:

Antitrust

  • New Mexico State Investment Council v. Bank of America Corp., et al. (D.N.M.):  Representing Morgan Stanley in a class action against leading CDS dealers, alleging a conspiracy to manipulate the auction process used to value CDS contracts at settlement. 
  • In re Interest Rate Swaps Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.):  Representing Morgan Stanley in a class action alleging dealers conspired to block exchange trading of IRS, as well as a related CFTC investigation.
  • Iowa Public Employees’ Retirement System, et al. v. Bank of America Corporation, et al. (S.D.N.Y.):  Representing Morgan Stanley in a class action alleging that prime brokers conspired to block anonymous peer-to-peer trading platforms for securities lending. 
  • SL-x IP S.á.r.l. v. Bank of America Corporation, et al.:  Won dismissal of all claims brought by the operator of a purported electronic stock loan trading platform, alleging a conspiracy by Morgan Stanley and several other major banks to boycott SL-x. Mr. Paskin continues to represent Morgan Stanley on appeal.
  • Tera Group, Inc., et al. v. Citigroup, Inc., et al. (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Morgan Stanley in an action alleging that CDS dealers conspired to block competing trading platforms.
  • Bank Bill Swap Rate (BBSW) Litigation (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Westpac in a class action alleging manipulation of the Australian BBSW benchmark.  
  • In re Credit Default Swaps Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Morgan Stanley in a class action alleging a conspiracy to block exchange trading of CDS. Mr. Paskin also advised Morgan Stanley in related DOJ and European Commission inquiries.
  • In re Aftermarket Filters Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Ill.):  Represented Cummins Filtration Inc. in a class action alleging price fixing in the market for automotive replacement filters.
  • Represented IBM in connection with the contested termination of a 1956 DOJ antitrust consent decree, as well as a DOJ antitrust investigation into agreements between IBM and Storage Technology Corporation.

Securities

  • Representing a preeminent investment bank in matters relating to the collapse of Archegos Capital Management.
  • JPMorgan RMBS Litigations:  Represented JPMorgan and related entities—including WaMu and Bear Stearns—in RMBS investor actions. In In re Washington Mutual Mortgage Backed Securities Litigation (W.D. Wash.), Mr. Paskin won a decision limiting RMBS class claims based on tranche‑level standing, eliminating claims covering $7.5 billion in securities. In Dexia SA/NV, et al. v. Bear, Stearns & Co., et al. (S.D.N.Y. and N.Y. Sup. Ct.), Mr. Paskin won summary judgment in federal court covering certificates worth over $1.5 billion.
  • Willis v. Big Lots, Inc., et al. and In re Big Lots, Inc. Shareholder Litigation (S.D. Ohio):  Represented Big Lots in securities and derivative litigation alleging insider trading and misstatements regarding the company’s performance and prospects. Mr. Paskin also represented Big Lots in related SEC and U.S. Attorney investigations.
  • In re Chemed Corp. Securities Litigation (S.D. Ohio) and In re Chemed Corp., Shareholder Derivative Litigation (D. Del.):  Represented Chemed and individual defendants in class action securities and shareholder derivative litigation.
  • Lentsch v. Vista Outdoor Inc., et al. (D. Utah):  Represented Vista Outdoor in a securities class action related to alleged misrepresentations about the company’s performance and goodwill impairments.
  • State of New Jersey and its Division of Investment v. Sprint Corporation, et al. (D. Kan.):  Won summary judgment in a securities class action alleging misstatements concerning employment contracts with Sprint’s former CEO and President. Mr. Paskin also represented Sprint in shareholder litigation in Kansas state court related to the recombination of Sprint’s FON and PCS “tracking stocks.”
  • In re Beazer Homes USA, Inc. Securities Litigation (N.D. Ga.):  Represented Beazer in securities and derivative litigation alleging improper mortgage origination practices and accounting improprieties designed to obscure the impact of the declining housing market.
  • Represented Lucent Technologies in one of the largest securities class actions in history (D.N.J.), and related federal and state securities, derivative, whistleblower and bankruptcy litigation and SEC and U.S. Attorney investigations.

Contracts and General Commercial Litigation

  • Antara Capital Master Fund LP et al. v. Bombardier Inc. et al. (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):  Representing Bombardier in a bondholder action alleging that recent divestitures constituted a breach of certain covenants in Bombardier’s indentures, and seeking to invalidate default waivers obtained through a consent solicitation. 
  • Loomis Sayles Trust Co. v. Citigroup Global Markets (S.D.N.Y.): Representing Citigroup in putative class action litigation asserting contract and fiduciary duty claims for alleged failure to achieve “best execution” in equity trades.
  • United Natural Foods, Inc. v. Goldman Sachs (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):  Won dismissal (and affirmance on appeal) of breach of contract and fraud action brought against Goldman Sachs by its former client United Natural Foods, Inc. (“UNFI”) relating to the syndication of financing for UNFI’s $3 billion acquisition of SuperValu in 2018.
  • Akorn, Inc. v. Fresenius Kabi AG, et al. (Del. Ch. and Del.):  Represented Akorn in litigation regarding Fresenius’s termination of a $4.3 billion merger agreement. After expedited proceedings, the case culminated in a one-week bench trial in July 2018 and subsequent expedited appeal.  It is one of a handful of cases regarding termination rights arising from material adverse event (“MAE”) provisions to be tried to a decision, and the first such appeal decided by the Supreme Court of Delaware.
  • Petersen Energía Inversora v. Argentine Republic and YPF S.A. and Eton Park Capital Management v. Argentine Republic and YPF S.A. (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented YPF against claims by minority shareholders arising out of Argentina’s 2012 expropriation of a controlling stake in YPF.
  • Morgan Stanley v. Discover Financial Services (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):  Won partial summary judgment for Morgan Stanley in a breach of contract action based on Discover’s refusal to pay a special dividend of approximately $800 million.
  • IBM v. Lexmark (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented IBM in a contract action relating to the sale of IBM’s printer business. The case culminated in a two‑week bench trial and judgment for IBM in excess of $55 million.

Financial Reorganization & Restructuring

  • Moby S.p.A. v. Morgan Stanley, et al. (N.Y. Sup.), Moby S.p.A. v. Morgan Stanley, et al. (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.), and In re Moby S.p.A. (Bankr. S.D. Fla.):  Won the dismissal of litigation filed against Morgan Stanley by Moby S.p.A., alleging that Morgan Stanley tortiously interfered with Moby’s restructuring proceedings in Italy.  He continues to represent Morgan Stanley in related chapter 15 bankruptcy proceedings filed by Moby.
  • In re Energy Futures Holdings Corp., et al. (Bankr. D. Del.):  Conflicts counsel to Energy Future Intermediate Holdings Company LLC in connection with the $49 billion bankruptcy of the largest electricity utility in Texas.
  • In re Tribune Company, et al. (Bankr. D. Del.):  Represented various affiliates of both Dimensional Fund Advisors and Goldman Sachs in connection with adversary proceedings and other litigation related to the Tribune bankruptcy.
  • In re Tronox Incorporated (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Credit Suisse, JPMorgan and other secured lenders in an adversary proceeding that sought to avoid transfers and obligations under a $200 million secured debt facility.
  • Represented Lucent in an adversary proceeding (Bankr. D. Del.) brought by the chapter 7 trustee of Winstar Communications, culminating in a 21‑day bench trial.

Mr. Paskin also maintains an active pro bono practice, which in recent years has involved matters related to voting rights and ballot access, the right to shelter for homeless families in New York City, and claims of racial discrimination.

Mr. Paskin was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He received a B.A. cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania in 1992 and a J.D. from Fordham School of Law in 1995, where he was a member of the Law Review. Following graduation, Mr. Paskin served as a law clerk to Hon. Paul J. Kelly, Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. He is a member of the International Bar Association, American Bar Association and New York City Bar Association.

Mr. Paskin joined Cravath in 1996 and was elected a partner in 2002. He served as the Litigation Hiring Partner from 2016 to 2020 and was a member of the Diversity Committee.

Education

  • J.D., 1995, Fordham University School of Law
  • B.A., 1992, University of Pennsylvania
    cum laude

Clerkships

  • Hon. Paul J. Kelly, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Admitted In

  • New York

Professional Affiliations

American Bankruptcy Institute

American Bar Association

International Bar Association

New York City Bar Association

Rankings

Am Law Litigation Daily

  • Litigator of the Week (April 14, 2016)

Benchmark Litigation

  • Antitrust Star - National (2023-2018)
  • Future Star (2015)
  • General Commercial Star - National (2023-2017)
  • Local Litigation Star: Antitrust - New York (2023‑2016)
  • Local Litigation Star: General Commercial - New York (2023-2018)
  • Local Litigation Star: Bankruptcy - New York (2017, 2016)
  • Local Litigation Star: Securities - New York (2023‑2016)
  • Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America (2017)

Best Lawyers in America

  • Commercial Litigation (2023‑2015)
  • Litigation: Banking & Finance (2023)

Lawdragon

  • 500 Leading Lawyers in America (2023-2017)
  • 500 Leading Litigators in America (2022)

The Legal 500 US

  • Antitrust (2017)
  • Corporate Restructuring (2015, 2014, 2012)
  • Financial Services: Litigation (2022, 2019, 2017‑2014, 2012)
  • General Commercial Disputes (2022)
  • Securities Litigation (2017)

Super Lawyers - New York

  • General Litigation (2021‑2013)

Deals & Cases

March 31, 2023

Morgan Stanley Wins Decision Affirming Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Against Major Banks

On Friday, March 24, a three‑judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled in favor of Cravath client Morgan Stanley, banks Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan and UBS, and EquiLend, a provider of electronic stock lending services.

Deals & Cases

August 11, 2022

Morgan Stanley Wins Dismissal of Claims with Prejudice in Lawsuit Related to Italian Shipping Company’s Restructuring

On August 5, 2022, the New York Supreme Court, Commercial Division, dismissed with prejudice a lawsuit brought by Moby S.p.A., one of the world’s largest passenger shipping companies, against Cravath client Morgan Stanley and two of its employees. The lawsuit was related to Moby’s restructuring proceeding in Milan, Italy.

Deals & Cases

October 06, 2021

Morgan Stanley Wins Dismissal of Antitrust Suit

On October 1, 2021, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed consolidated antitrust suits brought by the parent company of an electronic stock‑loan trading platform, SL‑x IP S.á.r.l., and its subsidiaries, against Cravath client Morgan Stanley, banks Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan and UBS, and EquiLend, a provider of electronic stock lending services.

Deals & Cases

September 04, 2012

WaMu Defendants Settle for $26 Million After Winning Dismissal of $8 Billion in Mortgage Claims

On September 4, 2012, Cravath clients WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. and WaMu Capital Corp. (“WaMu”) agreed to settle a class action lawsuit arising from the sale of residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington for $26 million, far below the $558 million in damages the class had sought as covering approximately $2.4 billion in securities. The settlement in this action, which preempted a jury trial scheduled to commence in September 2012, followed Cravath’s prior success in obtaining dismissal of claims concerning the vast majority of the RMBS at issue in the action. On October 21, 2011, the court dismissed all claims for 110 “tranches” of securities that the named plaintiffs did not purchase, on the basis that the named plaintiffs did not have standing to sue on those tranches, and certified a class consisting only of the remaining 13 tranches. This decision in effect removed from litigation securities with an original face value of approximately $8 billion—with a commensurate reduction in WaMu’s potential exposure. Despite the fact that a class had been certified covering the remaining tranches and that the case survived a motion for summary judgment and was only weeks away from trial, the settlement value compares favorably to other RMBS class actions that settled in the early stages of litigation.

Deals & Cases

December 21, 2010

Sprint Granted Summary Judgment in Securities Class Action

On December 17, 2010, the United States District Court for the District of Kansas granted summary judgment in favor of Cravath clients Sprint Nextel Corporation and its outside directors in State of New Jersey v. Sprint Corporation et al., a securities class action that has been pending since 2003. The State of New Jersey asserted claims for securities fraud against Sprint and certain of its former officers and directors under Sections 10(b) and 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These claims were based on alleged false and misleading statements in Sprint’s 2001 and 2002 proxy statements and other filings; these filings stated that Sprint had entered into new employment agreements with its CEO and President at the time, William Esrey and Ronald LeMay, respectively, that were intended to ensure the long-term employment of the executives. Esrey and LeMay were terminated by Sprint in early 2003, and New Jersey alleged that their terminations were inevitable at the time of the earlier proxy statements because the executives had entered into tax shelters that were not sustainable and would result in devastating tax liabilities, making it impossible for them to continue to lead Sprint.

Michael A. Paskin focuses his practice on class actions and other complex litigation, primarily in the areas of antitrust, securities, contracts and general commercial disputes, and financial reorganization and restructuring. He has represented many leading financial institutions, including Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Westpac, in matters involving complex financial markets and products such as residential mortgage-backed securities, stock loans, credit default swaps, interest rate swaps and other derivatives, as well as loan syndication and interest rate benchmarks. Mr. Paskin also has represented corporate clients in various industries, including Akorn, Big Lots, Beazer Homes, Bombardier, Cummins, IBM, Lucent Technologies, Sprint and YPF S.A. In addition, he represents corporations and boards of directors in connection with internal investigations and inquiries by U.S. and foreign regulators, including the SEC, DOJ, CFTC and European Commission.

Praised as a “true star,” Mr. Paskin has been recommended by The Legal 500 US for his work in the financial services, general commercial, corporate restructuring, antitrust and securities litigation practice areas.  Benchmark Litigation has also recognized him as one of the “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America,” a “National Star” in general commercial and antitrust litigation and a “Local Litigation Star” in New York. Lawdragon has consistently selected Mr. Paskin as one of the “500 Leading Lawyers in America,” and has named him to its “500 Leading Litigators in America” list. He has additionally been recognized by The Best Lawyers in America and Super Lawyers for his litigation work. 

Mr. Paskin was featured as “Litigator of the Week” in The AmLaw Litigation Daily for representing the Republic of Argentina in litigation arising from its $80 billion sovereign debt default in 2001. After being retained as new counsel in February 2016, Mr. Paskin led a team that obtained the vacatur, first in the Southern District of New York and then on an expedited Second Circuit appeal, of extraordinary injunctions that had previously blocked Argentina’s access to the international capital markets. Mr. Paskin’s work for Argentina was also recognized in the Financial Times North America Innovative Lawyers report and received a “National Impact Case Award” from Benchmark Litigation.

Mr. Paskin’s other notable representations include:

Antitrust

  • New Mexico State Investment Council v. Bank of America Corp., et al. (D.N.M.):  Representing Morgan Stanley in a class action against leading CDS dealers, alleging a conspiracy to manipulate the auction process used to value CDS contracts at settlement. 
  • In re Interest Rate Swaps Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.):  Representing Morgan Stanley in a class action alleging dealers conspired to block exchange trading of IRS, as well as a related CFTC investigation.
  • Iowa Public Employees’ Retirement System, et al. v. Bank of America Corporation, et al. (S.D.N.Y.):  Representing Morgan Stanley in a class action alleging that prime brokers conspired to block anonymous peer-to-peer trading platforms for securities lending. 
  • SL-x IP S.á.r.l. v. Bank of America Corporation, et al.:  Won dismissal of all claims brought by the operator of a purported electronic stock loan trading platform, alleging a conspiracy by Morgan Stanley and several other major banks to boycott SL-x. Mr. Paskin continues to represent Morgan Stanley on appeal.
  • Tera Group, Inc., et al. v. Citigroup, Inc., et al. (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Morgan Stanley in an action alleging that CDS dealers conspired to block competing trading platforms.
  • Bank Bill Swap Rate (BBSW) Litigation (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Westpac in a class action alleging manipulation of the Australian BBSW benchmark.  
  • In re Credit Default Swaps Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Morgan Stanley in a class action alleging a conspiracy to block exchange trading of CDS. Mr. Paskin also advised Morgan Stanley in related DOJ and European Commission inquiries.
  • In re Aftermarket Filters Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Ill.):  Represented Cummins Filtration Inc. in a class action alleging price fixing in the market for automotive replacement filters.
  • Represented IBM in connection with the contested termination of a 1956 DOJ antitrust consent decree, as well as a DOJ antitrust investigation into agreements between IBM and Storage Technology Corporation.

Securities

  • Representing a preeminent investment bank in matters relating to the collapse of Archegos Capital Management.
  • JPMorgan RMBS Litigations:  Represented JPMorgan and related entities—including WaMu and Bear Stearns—in RMBS investor actions. In In re Washington Mutual Mortgage Backed Securities Litigation (W.D. Wash.), Mr. Paskin won a decision limiting RMBS class claims based on tranche‑level standing, eliminating claims covering $7.5 billion in securities. In Dexia SA/NV, et al. v. Bear, Stearns & Co., et al. (S.D.N.Y. and N.Y. Sup. Ct.), Mr. Paskin won summary judgment in federal court covering certificates worth over $1.5 billion.
  • Willis v. Big Lots, Inc., et al. and In re Big Lots, Inc. Shareholder Litigation (S.D. Ohio):  Represented Big Lots in securities and derivative litigation alleging insider trading and misstatements regarding the company’s performance and prospects. Mr. Paskin also represented Big Lots in related SEC and U.S. Attorney investigations.
  • In re Chemed Corp. Securities Litigation (S.D. Ohio) and In re Chemed Corp., Shareholder Derivative Litigation (D. Del.):  Represented Chemed and individual defendants in class action securities and shareholder derivative litigation.
  • Lentsch v. Vista Outdoor Inc., et al. (D. Utah):  Represented Vista Outdoor in a securities class action related to alleged misrepresentations about the company’s performance and goodwill impairments.
  • State of New Jersey and its Division of Investment v. Sprint Corporation, et al. (D. Kan.):  Won summary judgment in a securities class action alleging misstatements concerning employment contracts with Sprint’s former CEO and President. Mr. Paskin also represented Sprint in shareholder litigation in Kansas state court related to the recombination of Sprint’s FON and PCS “tracking stocks.”
  • In re Beazer Homes USA, Inc. Securities Litigation (N.D. Ga.):  Represented Beazer in securities and derivative litigation alleging improper mortgage origination practices and accounting improprieties designed to obscure the impact of the declining housing market.
  • Represented Lucent Technologies in one of the largest securities class actions in history (D.N.J.), and related federal and state securities, derivative, whistleblower and bankruptcy litigation and SEC and U.S. Attorney investigations.

Contracts and General Commercial Litigation

  • Antara Capital Master Fund LP et al. v. Bombardier Inc. et al. (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):  Representing Bombardier in a bondholder action alleging that recent divestitures constituted a breach of certain covenants in Bombardier’s indentures, and seeking to invalidate default waivers obtained through a consent solicitation. 
  • Loomis Sayles Trust Co. v. Citigroup Global Markets (S.D.N.Y.): Representing Citigroup in putative class action litigation asserting contract and fiduciary duty claims for alleged failure to achieve “best execution” in equity trades.
  • United Natural Foods, Inc. v. Goldman Sachs (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):  Won dismissal (and affirmance on appeal) of breach of contract and fraud action brought against Goldman Sachs by its former client United Natural Foods, Inc. (“UNFI”) relating to the syndication of financing for UNFI’s $3 billion acquisition of SuperValu in 2018.
  • Akorn, Inc. v. Fresenius Kabi AG, et al. (Del. Ch. and Del.):  Represented Akorn in litigation regarding Fresenius’s termination of a $4.3 billion merger agreement. After expedited proceedings, the case culminated in a one-week bench trial in July 2018 and subsequent expedited appeal.  It is one of a handful of cases regarding termination rights arising from material adverse event (“MAE”) provisions to be tried to a decision, and the first such appeal decided by the Supreme Court of Delaware.
  • Petersen Energía Inversora v. Argentine Republic and YPF S.A. and Eton Park Capital Management v. Argentine Republic and YPF S.A. (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented YPF against claims by minority shareholders arising out of Argentina’s 2012 expropriation of a controlling stake in YPF.
  • Morgan Stanley v. Discover Financial Services (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):  Won partial summary judgment for Morgan Stanley in a breach of contract action based on Discover’s refusal to pay a special dividend of approximately $800 million.
  • IBM v. Lexmark (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented IBM in a contract action relating to the sale of IBM’s printer business. The case culminated in a two‑week bench trial and judgment for IBM in excess of $55 million.

Financial Reorganization & Restructuring

  • Moby S.p.A. v. Morgan Stanley, et al. (N.Y. Sup.), Moby S.p.A. v. Morgan Stanley, et al. (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.), and In re Moby S.p.A. (Bankr. S.D. Fla.):  Won the dismissal of litigation filed against Morgan Stanley by Moby S.p.A., alleging that Morgan Stanley tortiously interfered with Moby’s restructuring proceedings in Italy.  He continues to represent Morgan Stanley in related chapter 15 bankruptcy proceedings filed by Moby.
  • In re Energy Futures Holdings Corp., et al. (Bankr. D. Del.):  Conflicts counsel to Energy Future Intermediate Holdings Company LLC in connection with the $49 billion bankruptcy of the largest electricity utility in Texas.
  • In re Tribune Company, et al. (Bankr. D. Del.):  Represented various affiliates of both Dimensional Fund Advisors and Goldman Sachs in connection with adversary proceedings and other litigation related to the Tribune bankruptcy.
  • In re Tronox Incorporated (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Credit Suisse, JPMorgan and other secured lenders in an adversary proceeding that sought to avoid transfers and obligations under a $200 million secured debt facility.
  • Represented Lucent in an adversary proceeding (Bankr. D. Del.) brought by the chapter 7 trustee of Winstar Communications, culminating in a 21‑day bench trial.

Mr. Paskin also maintains an active pro bono practice, which in recent years has involved matters related to voting rights and ballot access, the right to shelter for homeless families in New York City, and claims of racial discrimination.

Mr. Paskin was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He received a B.A. cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania in 1992 and a J.D. from Fordham School of Law in 1995, where he was a member of the Law Review. Following graduation, Mr. Paskin served as a law clerk to Hon. Paul J. Kelly, Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. He is a member of the International Bar Association, American Bar Association and New York City Bar Association.

Mr. Paskin joined Cravath in 1996 and was elected a partner in 2002. He served as the Litigation Hiring Partner from 2016 to 2020 and was a member of the Diversity Committee.

Praised as a “true star,” Mr. Paskin has been recommended by The Legal 500 US for his work in the financial services, general commercial, corporate restructuring, antitrust and securities litigation practice areas.  Benchmark Litigation has also recognized him as one of the “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America,” a “National Star” in general commercial and antitrust litigation and a “Local Litigation Star” in New York. Lawdragon has consistently selected Mr. Paskin as one of the “500 Leading Lawyers in America,” and has named him to its “500 Leading Litigators in America” list. He has additionally been recognized by The Best Lawyers in America and Super Lawyers for his litigation work. 

Mr. Paskin was featured as “Litigator of the Week” in The AmLaw Litigation Daily for representing the Republic of Argentina in litigation arising from its $80 billion sovereign debt default in 2001. After being retained as new counsel in February 2016, Mr. Paskin led a team that obtained the vacatur, first in the Southern District of New York and then on an expedited Second Circuit appeal, of extraordinary injunctions that had previously blocked Argentina’s access to the international capital markets. Mr. Paskin’s work for Argentina was also recognized in the Financial Times North America Innovative Lawyers report and received a “National Impact Case Award” from Benchmark Litigation.

Mr. Paskin’s other notable representations include:

Antitrust

  • New Mexico State Investment Council v. Bank of America Corp., et al. (D.N.M.):  Representing Morgan Stanley in a class action against leading CDS dealers, alleging a conspiracy to manipulate the auction process used to value CDS contracts at settlement. 
  • In re Interest Rate Swaps Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.):  Representing Morgan Stanley in a class action alleging dealers conspired to block exchange trading of IRS, as well as a related CFTC investigation.
  • Iowa Public Employees’ Retirement System, et al. v. Bank of America Corporation, et al. (S.D.N.Y.):  Representing Morgan Stanley in a class action alleging that prime brokers conspired to block anonymous peer-to-peer trading platforms for securities lending. 
  • SL-x IP S.á.r.l. v. Bank of America Corporation, et al.:  Won dismissal of all claims brought by the operator of a purported electronic stock loan trading platform, alleging a conspiracy by Morgan Stanley and several other major banks to boycott SL-x. Mr. Paskin continues to represent Morgan Stanley on appeal.
  • Tera Group, Inc., et al. v. Citigroup, Inc., et al. (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Morgan Stanley in an action alleging that CDS dealers conspired to block competing trading platforms.
  • Bank Bill Swap Rate (BBSW) Litigation (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Westpac in a class action alleging manipulation of the Australian BBSW benchmark.  
  • In re Credit Default Swaps Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Morgan Stanley in a class action alleging a conspiracy to block exchange trading of CDS. Mr. Paskin also advised Morgan Stanley in related DOJ and European Commission inquiries.
  • In re Aftermarket Filters Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Ill.):  Represented Cummins Filtration Inc. in a class action alleging price fixing in the market for automotive replacement filters.
  • Represented IBM in connection with the contested termination of a 1956 DOJ antitrust consent decree, as well as a DOJ antitrust investigation into agreements between IBM and Storage Technology Corporation.

Securities

  • Representing a preeminent investment bank in matters relating to the collapse of Archegos Capital Management.
  • JPMorgan RMBS Litigations:  Represented JPMorgan and related entities—including WaMu and Bear Stearns—in RMBS investor actions. In In re Washington Mutual Mortgage Backed Securities Litigation (W.D. Wash.), Mr. Paskin won a decision limiting RMBS class claims based on tranche‑level standing, eliminating claims covering $7.5 billion in securities. In Dexia SA/NV, et al. v. Bear, Stearns & Co., et al. (S.D.N.Y. and N.Y. Sup. Ct.), Mr. Paskin won summary judgment in federal court covering certificates worth over $1.5 billion.
  • Willis v. Big Lots, Inc., et al. and In re Big Lots, Inc. Shareholder Litigation (S.D. Ohio):  Represented Big Lots in securities and derivative litigation alleging insider trading and misstatements regarding the company’s performance and prospects. Mr. Paskin also represented Big Lots in related SEC and U.S. Attorney investigations.
  • In re Chemed Corp. Securities Litigation (S.D. Ohio) and In re Chemed Corp., Shareholder Derivative Litigation (D. Del.):  Represented Chemed and individual defendants in class action securities and shareholder derivative litigation.
  • Lentsch v. Vista Outdoor Inc., et al. (D. Utah):  Represented Vista Outdoor in a securities class action related to alleged misrepresentations about the company’s performance and goodwill impairments.
  • State of New Jersey and its Division of Investment v. Sprint Corporation, et al. (D. Kan.):  Won summary judgment in a securities class action alleging misstatements concerning employment contracts with Sprint’s former CEO and President. Mr. Paskin also represented Sprint in shareholder litigation in Kansas state court related to the recombination of Sprint’s FON and PCS “tracking stocks.”
  • In re Beazer Homes USA, Inc. Securities Litigation (N.D. Ga.):  Represented Beazer in securities and derivative litigation alleging improper mortgage origination practices and accounting improprieties designed to obscure the impact of the declining housing market.
  • Represented Lucent Technologies in one of the largest securities class actions in history (D.N.J.), and related federal and state securities, derivative, whistleblower and bankruptcy litigation and SEC and U.S. Attorney investigations.

Contracts and General Commercial Litigation

  • Antara Capital Master Fund LP et al. v. Bombardier Inc. et al. (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):  Representing Bombardier in a bondholder action alleging that recent divestitures constituted a breach of certain covenants in Bombardier’s indentures, and seeking to invalidate default waivers obtained through a consent solicitation. 
  • Loomis Sayles Trust Co. v. Citigroup Global Markets (S.D.N.Y.): Representing Citigroup in putative class action litigation asserting contract and fiduciary duty claims for alleged failure to achieve “best execution” in equity trades.
  • United Natural Foods, Inc. v. Goldman Sachs (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):  Won dismissal (and affirmance on appeal) of breach of contract and fraud action brought against Goldman Sachs by its former client United Natural Foods, Inc. (“UNFI”) relating to the syndication of financing for UNFI’s $3 billion acquisition of SuperValu in 2018.
  • Akorn, Inc. v. Fresenius Kabi AG, et al. (Del. Ch. and Del.):  Represented Akorn in litigation regarding Fresenius’s termination of a $4.3 billion merger agreement. After expedited proceedings, the case culminated in a one-week bench trial in July 2018 and subsequent expedited appeal.  It is one of a handful of cases regarding termination rights arising from material adverse event (“MAE”) provisions to be tried to a decision, and the first such appeal decided by the Supreme Court of Delaware.
  • Petersen Energía Inversora v. Argentine Republic and YPF S.A. and Eton Park Capital Management v. Argentine Republic and YPF S.A. (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented YPF against claims by minority shareholders arising out of Argentina’s 2012 expropriation of a controlling stake in YPF.
  • Morgan Stanley v. Discover Financial Services (N.Y. Sup. Ct.):  Won partial summary judgment for Morgan Stanley in a breach of contract action based on Discover’s refusal to pay a special dividend of approximately $800 million.
  • IBM v. Lexmark (S.D.N.Y.):  Represented IBM in a contract action relating to the sale of IBM’s printer business. The case culminated in a two‑week bench trial and judgment for IBM in excess of $55 million.

Financial Reorganization & Restructuring

  • Moby S.p.A. v. Morgan Stanley, et al. (N.Y. Sup.), Moby S.p.A. v. Morgan Stanley, et al. (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.), and In re Moby S.p.A. (Bankr. S.D. Fla.):  Won the dismissal of litigation filed against Morgan Stanley by Moby S.p.A., alleging that Morgan Stanley tortiously interfered with Moby’s restructuring proceedings in Italy.  He continues to represent Morgan Stanley in related chapter 15 bankruptcy proceedings filed by Moby.
  • In re Energy Futures Holdings Corp., et al. (Bankr. D. Del.):  Conflicts counsel to Energy Future Intermediate Holdings Company LLC in connection with the $49 billion bankruptcy of the largest electricity utility in Texas.
  • In re Tribune Company, et al. (Bankr. D. Del.):  Represented various affiliates of both Dimensional Fund Advisors and Goldman Sachs in connection with adversary proceedings and other litigation related to the Tribune bankruptcy.
  • In re Tronox Incorporated (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.):  Represented Credit Suisse, JPMorgan and other secured lenders in an adversary proceeding that sought to avoid transfers and obligations under a $200 million secured debt facility.
  • Represented Lucent in an adversary proceeding (Bankr. D. Del.) brought by the chapter 7 trustee of Winstar Communications, culminating in a 21‑day bench trial.

Mr. Paskin also maintains an active pro bono practice, which in recent years has involved matters related to voting rights and ballot access, the right to shelter for homeless families in New York City, and claims of racial discrimination.

Mr. Paskin was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He received a B.A. cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania in 1992 and a J.D. from Fordham School of Law in 1995, where he was a member of the Law Review. Following graduation, Mr. Paskin served as a law clerk to Hon. Paul J. Kelly, Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. He is a member of the International Bar Association, American Bar Association and New York City Bar Association.

Mr. Paskin joined Cravath in 1996 and was elected a partner in 2002. He served as the Litigation Hiring Partner from 2016 to 2020 and was a member of the Diversity Committee.

Education

  • J.D., 1995, Fordham University School of Law
  • B.A., 1992, University of Pennsylvania
    cum laude

Clerkships

  • Hon. Paul J. Kelly, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Admitted In

  • New York

Professional Affiliations

American Bankruptcy Institute

American Bar Association

International Bar Association

New York City Bar Association

Rankings

Am Law Litigation Daily

  • Litigator of the Week (April 14, 2016)

Benchmark Litigation

  • Antitrust Star - National (2023-2018)
  • Future Star (2015)
  • General Commercial Star - National (2023-2017)
  • Local Litigation Star: Antitrust - New York (2023‑2016)
  • Local Litigation Star: General Commercial - New York (2023-2018)
  • Local Litigation Star: Bankruptcy - New York (2017, 2016)
  • Local Litigation Star: Securities - New York (2023‑2016)
  • Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America (2017)

Best Lawyers in America

  • Commercial Litigation (2023‑2015)
  • Litigation: Banking & Finance (2023)

Lawdragon

  • 500 Leading Lawyers in America (2023-2017)
  • 500 Leading Litigators in America (2022)

The Legal 500 US

  • Antitrust (2017)
  • Corporate Restructuring (2015, 2014, 2012)
  • Financial Services: Litigation (2022, 2019, 2017‑2014, 2012)
  • General Commercial Disputes (2022)
  • Securities Litigation (2017)

Super Lawyers - New York

  • General Litigation (2021‑2013)

Deals & Cases

March 31, 2023

Morgan Stanley Wins Decision Affirming Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Against Major Banks

On Friday, March 24, a three‑judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled in favor of Cravath client Morgan Stanley, banks Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan and UBS, and EquiLend, a provider of electronic stock lending services.

Deals & Cases

August 11, 2022

Morgan Stanley Wins Dismissal of Claims with Prejudice in Lawsuit Related to Italian Shipping Company’s Restructuring

On August 5, 2022, the New York Supreme Court, Commercial Division, dismissed with prejudice a lawsuit brought by Moby S.p.A., one of the world’s largest passenger shipping companies, against Cravath client Morgan Stanley and two of its employees. The lawsuit was related to Moby’s restructuring proceeding in Milan, Italy.

Deals & Cases

October 06, 2021

Morgan Stanley Wins Dismissal of Antitrust Suit

On October 1, 2021, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed consolidated antitrust suits brought by the parent company of an electronic stock‑loan trading platform, SL‑x IP S.á.r.l., and its subsidiaries, against Cravath client Morgan Stanley, banks Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan and UBS, and EquiLend, a provider of electronic stock lending services.

Deals & Cases

September 04, 2012

WaMu Defendants Settle for $26 Million After Winning Dismissal of $8 Billion in Mortgage Claims

On September 4, 2012, Cravath clients WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. and WaMu Capital Corp. (“WaMu”) agreed to settle a class action lawsuit arising from the sale of residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington for $26 million, far below the $558 million in damages the class had sought as covering approximately $2.4 billion in securities. The settlement in this action, which preempted a jury trial scheduled to commence in September 2012, followed Cravath’s prior success in obtaining dismissal of claims concerning the vast majority of the RMBS at issue in the action. On October 21, 2011, the court dismissed all claims for 110 “tranches” of securities that the named plaintiffs did not purchase, on the basis that the named plaintiffs did not have standing to sue on those tranches, and certified a class consisting only of the remaining 13 tranches. This decision in effect removed from litigation securities with an original face value of approximately $8 billion—with a commensurate reduction in WaMu’s potential exposure. Despite the fact that a class had been certified covering the remaining tranches and that the case survived a motion for summary judgment and was only weeks away from trial, the settlement value compares favorably to other RMBS class actions that settled in the early stages of litigation.

Deals & Cases

December 21, 2010

Sprint Granted Summary Judgment in Securities Class Action

On December 17, 2010, the United States District Court for the District of Kansas granted summary judgment in favor of Cravath clients Sprint Nextel Corporation and its outside directors in State of New Jersey v. Sprint Corporation et al., a securities class action that has been pending since 2003. The State of New Jersey asserted claims for securities fraud against Sprint and certain of its former officers and directors under Sections 10(b) and 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These claims were based on alleged false and misleading statements in Sprint’s 2001 and 2002 proxy statements and other filings; these filings stated that Sprint had entered into new employment agreements with its CEO and President at the time, William Esrey and Ronald LeMay, respectively, that were intended to ensure the long-term employment of the executives. Esrey and LeMay were terminated by Sprint in early 2003, and New Jersey alleged that their terminations were inevitable at the time of the earlier proxy statements because the executives had entered into tax shelters that were not sustainable and would result in devastating tax liabilities, making it impossible for them to continue to lead Sprint.

Cravath Bicentennial

Celebrating 200 years of partnership. In 2019, we celebrated our bicentennial. Our history mirrors that of our nation. Integral to our story is our culture.

Explore

Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP Logo
  • CONTACT US
  • DISCLAIMERS
  • PRIVACY NOTICE
  • ALUMNI PORTAL
  • DIVERSITY & INCLUSION
  • OUR STORY

Attorney Advertising. © 2023   Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP.