Shepard Goldfein, the firm’s Antitrust/Global Competition practice leader, handles a wide variety of cases — from large, complex antitrust and sports-related litigation to white collar criminal investigations and mass disaster litigation. Mr. Goldfein obtained a jury verdict in favor of the National Football League in a case brought by Victor Kiam in connection with the sale of the New England Patriots. After six weeks of jury trial, Mr. Goldfein also secured a directed verdict for the NFL in an antitrust action brought by the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission in connection with the relocation of the Rams franchise from Anaheim to St. Louis. In the highly publicized antitrust action brought by the United States Football League against the NFL, Mr. Goldfein served as one of the trial counsel who successfully defended the NFL and its member clubs against claims of monopolization and other antitrust violations. He also defended the NFL in the numerous lawsuits filed by NFL players challenging NFL player employment rules, including the case brought by Freeman McNeil. Mr. Goldfein also successfully defended the NFL in the case brought against it by former New England Patriots owner William Sullivan, who challenged the validity of the League’s public ownership policy. Mr. Goldfein also advises and has served as litigation counsel in several matters for the National Basketball Association, the National Hockey League and the Arena Football League. In this regard, Mr. Goldfein represented the NHL in connection with its season-long work stoppage and participated in the negotiation and authorship of the NHL’s collective bargaining agreement. Mr. Goldfein also regularly has counseled the NHL on a variety of its business practices and has served as counsel to the commissioner on a variety of matters brought before the commissioner for arbitration. Mr. Goldfein also has litigated many treble damages class action price fixing cases. He has defended such clients as Christie’s plc, Christie’s Inc., the American Stock Exchange, International Paper Co., NewYork Presbyterian Hospital and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, in such litigations as well as a variety of clients in criminal and civil investigations conducted by the antitrust division of the Department of Justice. Mr. Goldfein has worked on mass disaster criminal investigations and litigations. He successfully defended Great Adventure, Inc. and its parent company, Six Flags Corporation, against charges of aggravated manslaughter arising out of the tragic deaths that resulted from a fire at Great Adventure Amusement Park, and represented the New York State Urban Development Corporation in a criminal investigation and wrongful death litigation arising out of a fire at Schomburg Plaza, a high-rise residential complex in Manhattan. In addition, Mr. Goldfein served as lead trial counsel for Bally Manufacturing Corporation in its products liability defense of the wrongful death and personal injury actions that arose out of the San Juan Dupont Plaza Hotel fire in Puerto Rico. He also successfully represented the landlords of the Happy Land Social Club, where 87 people died in an arson fire, with regard to a felony manslaughter investigation. Mr. Goldfein writes a monthly column for the New York Law Journal focusing on antitrust issues. He was included among The Hockey News’ 2012 “People of Power & Influence” list. Mr. Goldfein has been repeatedly selected for inclusion in Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business and The Best Lawyers in America.
226
On December 3, 2009, in In re Short Sale Antitrust Litigation (No. 08-0420-cv), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a putative class action alleging collusion among certain financial institutions that serve as “prime brokers” in connection with short sale (...)
363
On April 8, 2009, the English High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, granted British Airways’ request for an order striking two Plaintiffs’ representative claims. Though still subject to appeal, this decision potentially represents a significant obstacle to efforts underway to apply (...)
363
On April 22, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held in Rambus Inc. v. FTC, No. 07-1086, that the FTC failed to prove that Rambus Inc. violated antitrust law when it participated in a trade organization’s setting of industry technology standards without (...)
717
In a 7-2 decision on May 21, 2007, the Supreme Court held that a complaint alleging antitrust conspiracy based on parallel conduct alone fails to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, No. 05-1126. Further, the Court held that a bare (...)
256
On April 2, 2007, the Antitrust Modernization Commission (“AMC”) released its Report and Recommendations to Congress and President Bush. The bipartisan AMC was commissioned by the Modernization Act of 2002 to examine whether antitrust law needed to be modernized, solicit views from interested (...)
341
On February 20, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a significant opinion in which it concluded that the test it had set forth previously to govern predatory pricing cases applies also to cases involving allegations of predatory bidding. See Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Ross-Simmons Hardwood Lumber Co., (...)
294
On June 14 2004, in a unanimous judgment, the Supreme Court blocked foreign plaintiffs from bringing an antitrust claim in U.S. courts seeking damages based on higher foreign prices that are allegedly independent of the domestic effects of higher domestic prices. However, the case was remanded (...)
