Antitrust Cases filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Cases 1 - 10 of 369
In re Eyewear Antitrust Litigation
as 1:2024cv04826
Plaintiff: Michelle Morgan, Monet Jonas, Brad Hoag and others
Defendant: EssilorLuxottica SA, Luxottica Group S.p.A., Essilor International SAS and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2 Antitrust Litigation
Price v. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company et al
as 1:2024cv01981
Plaintiff: Percy Price
Defendant: The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Compagnie Gnrale des tablissements Michelin SCA, Michelin North America Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)
Curran et al v. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company et al
as 1:2024cv01419
Plaintiff: Michael Curran and Timothy Borland
Defendant: The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Compagnie Gnrale des tablissements Michelin SCA, Michelin North America Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 at Fed. Question: Anti-trust
World Association of Icehockey Players Unions North America Division et al v. National Hockey League et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2024cv01066
Plaintiff: World Association of Icehockey Players Unions North America Division, World Association of Icehockey Players Unions USA Corporation, Tanner Gould and others
Defendant: National Hockey League, Canadian Hockey League, Western Hockey League and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)
Ringgold v. EssilorLuxottica, S.A. et al
as 1:2024cv00510
Plaintiff: Pamela Ringgold
Defendant: EssilorLuxottica, S.A., Luxottica Group, S.p.A.,, Essilor International SAS and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15 Antitrust Litigation
UFCW Local 1500 Welfare Fund et al v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2023cv10030
Plaintiff: UFCW Local 1500 Welfare Fund, UFOA FAMILY PROTECTION PLAN LOCAL 854, UFOA FOR RETIRED FIRE OFFICERS FAMILY PROTECTION PLAN and others
Defendant: Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity Action
Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Company et al v. Celgene Corporation et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2023cv07871
Plaintiff: Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Company individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated doing business as Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Louisiana and HMO Louisiana, Inc.
Defendant: Celgene Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb Company, Aurobindo Pharma Limited and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)
Oklahoma Firefighters Pension and Retirement System v. Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2023cv05095
Plaintiff: Oklahoma Firefighters Pension and Retirement System
Defendant: Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft, Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Citigroup Global Markets Limited and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)
Go New York Tours Inc. v. Gray Line New York Tours, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv04256
Plaintiff: Go New York Tours Inc.
Defendant: Gray Line New York Tours, Inc., Twin America LLC, Sightseeing Pass LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)
Ohio Carpenters' Pension Fund et al v. Deutsche Bank AG et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2022cv10462
Plaintiff: Ohio Carpenters' Pension Fund, Electrical Workers Pension Fund Local 103 I.B.E.W. and San Bernardino County Employees' Retirement Association
Defendant: Deutsche Bank AG, Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Cooperatieve Rabobank U.A. (f/k/a Cooperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen-Boerenleenbank U.A.) and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?