Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, Fka Credit Suisse First Boston LLC, et al. v. Glen Billing et al. (551 U.S. 264)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 18, 2007 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 551 U.S. 264 · 127 S. Ct. 2383
- Decided
- June 18, 2007
- Term
- October Term 2006
- Vote
- 7–1
- Majority author
- Justice Breyer
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court. A group of buyers of newly issued securities have filed an antitrust lawsuit 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”). The question before us is whether there is a “‘plain repugnancy’” between these antitrust claims and the federal securities law. See Gordon v. New York Stock Exchange, Inc., 422 U. S. 659, 682 (1975) (quoting United States v. Philadelphia Nat. Bank, 374 U. S. 321, 350-351 (1963)). We conclude that there is. Consequently we must interpret the securities laws as implicitly precluding the application of the antitrust laws to the conduct alleged in this case. See 422 U. S., at 682, 689, 691; see also United States v. National Assn. of Securities Dealers, Inc., 422 U. S. 694 (1975) (NASD); Silver v. New York Stock Exchange, 373 U. S. 341 (1963). I A The underwriting practices at issue take place during the course of an initial…
Excerpt of a 36,648-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.