 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
COMPLAINT
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
PLAINTIFFS CARDS RETAIL STORES DEBIT CARD RETAILERS CREDIT CARDS TRANSACTION MASTERCARD VISA CHECK/MASTERMONEY MEMBERS MASTERMONEY UNITED STATES POS DEBIT INTERCHANGE FEE DEBIT CARD MARKET TYING ARRANGEMENTS PAYMENT SYSTEMS CIRCUIT CITY FOOD MARKETING INSTITUTE POS DEBIT NETWORKS PLASTIC CARDS TRANSACTION AMOUNT TRADE ASSOCIATION DISCOUNT FEES DEFENDANTS INTERNATIONAL MASS RETAIL RETAIL PURCHASE CO-CONSPIRATORS |
Robert L. Begleiter (RB-7052) Lloyd Constantine (LC-8465) Amy N. Roth (AR-4534) Stacey Anne Mahoney (SM-5425) Mitchell C. Shapiro (MS-1019) Jeffrey I. Shinder (JS-5719) Gordon Schnell (GS-2567) CONSTANTINE & PARTNERS, P.C. 477 Madison Avenue - 11th Floor New York, NY 10022 (212) 350-2700 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., The Limited, Inc., Sears Roebuck and Company, Inc., Safeway Inc., Circuit City Stores, Inc., and All Similarly Situated Persons, The International Mass Retail Association, The National Retail Federation and The Food Marketing Institute, and Lead Counsel for The Plaintiffs UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------------------------x SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND MASTER FILE NO. CV-96-5238 (Gleeson, J.) (Mann, M.J.) IN RE VISA CHECK/MASTERMONEY ANTITRUST LITIGATION -----------------------------------------------------------------------------x This Document Relates To All Actions -----------------------------------------------------------------------------x WAL-MART STORES, INC., THE LIMITED, INC., SEARS ROEBUCK AND COMPANY, INC., SAFEWAY INC. and CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INC., on Behalf of Themselves and All Similarly Situated Persons, THE INTERNATIONAL MASS RETAIL ASSOCIATION, THE NATIONAL RETAIL FEDERATION and THE FOOD MARKETING INSTITUTE, : Plaintiffs, : CV-96-5238 v. VISA U.S.A. INC. and MASTERCARD INTERNATIONAL, INC., Defendants. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------x BERNIE'S ARMY-NAVY STORE, AUTO-LAB OF FARMINGTON HILLS, and BURLINGTON COAT FACTORY WAREHOUSE CORPORATION, On Behalf Of Themselves And All Others Similarly Situated,SNIPPETS: |
|
2
.
ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES OF DEFENDANT
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
VISA MASTERCARD ALLEGATIONS POLICIES REGULATIONS CARDS COMPLAINT ADMITS PLAINTIFFS CONTEXT PAYMENT SYSTEM RESPONSIVE PLEADING TRUTH MATTER DENIES RETAILERS INFORMATION SUFFICIENT MASTER-CARD RETAIL TRANSACTIONS EXPRESSLY AVERS RESPECTFULLY REFERS ALLEGATIONS SET MERCHANT AGREEMENTS FIRST NATIONAL BANK DEFINITION THEREIN LIMITATION APPLICABLE BULLETINS CLASS ACTION TERMINOLOGY |
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
IN RE :
:
:
:
:
VISA CHECKMASTERMONEY ANTITRUST :
LITIGATION :
This Document relates To:
All Actions
____________________--------------------------------------------- ---------x
WAL-MART STORES, INC., THE LIMITED, INC., :
SEARS ROEBUCK AND COMPANY, INC., SAFEWAY :
INC. and CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INC., on Behalf :
of Themselves and All Similarly Situated Persons,
THE INTERNATIONAL MASS RETAIL
ASSOCIATION and THE NATIONAL RETAIL
FEDERATION,:
Plaintiffs, :
V.
VISA U.S.A., INC. and :
MASTERCARD INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
Defendants.
BERNIE'S ARMY-NAVY STORE, AUTO-LAB OF I
FARMINGTON HILLS, and BURLINGTON COAT :
FACTORY WAREHOUSE CORPORATION, On Behalf :
Of Themselves And All Others Similarly Situated,
Plaintiffs,
V.
VISA U.S.A., INC., and MASTERCARD
INTERNATIONAL.
SNIPPETS:
|
|
3
.
ORDER AFFIRMING CLASS CERTIFICATION
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
TRADE EVID SERV CITE CERTIFICATION DISTRICT DEBIT CARDS DISTRICT COURT VISA MERCHANTS DAMAGES CLASS ACTION CREDIT CARDS MEMBERS INTERCHANGE FEES DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFFS COMMON DISCRETION MASTERCARD APPEALS TIE DEFENSE SUBSTANTIVE ELEMENTS METHODOLOGY SHERMAN ACT PREDOMINANCE REPRESENTATION CLASS SUIT |
280 F.3d 124
2001-2 Trade Cases P 73,459, 50 Fed.R.Serv.3d 993, 57 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 583
(Cite as: 280 F.3d 124)
compelling need for immediate
United States Court of Appeals, Civ.Proc.Rule 23, 28 U.S.C.A.
Second Circuit. [2] Federal Civil Procedure
In re VISA CHECK/MASTERMONEY ANTITRUST 170Ak175 Most Cited Cases
LITIGATION. A motion to strike expert
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Limited, Inc., Sears Roebuck & a inquiry distinct from that
Company, Safeway Inc., support of a motion for class
Circuit City Stores, Inc., National Retail Federation and the typically not made until later
Food Marketing association with a motion for
Institute, International Mass Retail Association, and All limine, or at trial, and a
Similarly Situated consideration of a motion for
Persons, Plaintiffs-Appellees, of waiting until such an
v. Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 23, 28
Visa U.S.A. Inc. and Mastercard International Incorporated,
Defendants- [3] Federal Courts 577
Appellants. 170Bk577 Most Cited Cases
Docket No. 00-7699. Exercise of interlocutory
was warranted in antitrust
Argued Feb. 5, 2001. credit card associations that
Decided Oct. 17, 2001. credit cards to also accept
Large retailers, joined by a number of smaller merchants to resolve uncertainty
and three retail associations, brought antitrust action evaluating expert opinions at
challenging rules issued by credit card associations that address questions of
required stores accepting their credit cards to also accept light of individualized damage
their debit cards. The United States District Court for the cases. Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule
Eastern District of New York, John Gleeson, J., certified the [4] Federal Courts 817
class. Credit card associations appealed. The Court of 170Bk817 Most Cited Cases
Appeals, Sotomayor, Circuit Judge, held that: (1) merchants
established that their alleged overcharge theory was The Court of Appeals reviews a
amenable to common proof; (2) causation could be proven denial of a motion for class
on class wide basis; (3) individualized issues did not standard; provided that the
predominate due to associations' defense of mitigation of proper legal standards in
damages by steering; (4) class would be manageable; (5) its decision may only be
district court was not required to determine which of two of discretion. Fed.Rules
available techniques for measuring damages would be used
before certifying class; and (6) certification was warranted [5] Federal Civil Procedure
in spite of its possible coercive effect. 170Ak174 Most Cited Cases
Affirmed. When determining the propriety
SNIPPETS:
|
|
4
.
ANSWER OF DEFENDANT TO 2ND AMENDED COMPLAINT
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
ALLEGATION DENIES PARAGRAPH CARDS BASIS TRUTH VISA ADMITS TRANSACTIONS ALLEGATION CONTAINED THEREIN MEMBERS BANK CARDS SUFFICIENT KNOWLEDGE CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION AMENDED CONSOLIDATED CLASS MERCHANT MASTERMONEY ALLEGATIONS RELATING CARDHOLDERS MERCHANT AGREEMENTS MERCHANT HONOR POS DEBIT INTERCHANGE FEE OPERATING REGULATIONS CREDIT CARDS MASTER-CARD MASTERCARD PAYMENT SYSTEM DEFENDANT VISA |
UNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------____________________----------------------
X
INRE
VISA CHECKMASTERMONEY ANTITRUST ; MASTER FILE NO.
LITIGATION CV-96-5238
-------------------------------------------------------------- X (Gleeson,
This Document Relates to: All Actions
-------------------------------------------------------------- X
ANSWER OF DEFENDANT VISA U.S.A. INC.
TO, SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION
Defendant Visa U.S.A. Inc. ("Visa"), through its attorneys, hereby answers
Second Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint. Visa answers by objecting to the titles
or captions that are not numbered allegations and that are found throughout the Complaint as an
improper method of pleading, and. Visa further admits, denies and alleges as to each numbered
paragraph of the Second Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint as follows:
1. Visa is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a
the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 1, and on that basis, denies each and every
allegation contained therein.
2. Visa denies each allegation, except as expressly admitted or
.,
below. Visa admits that its Operating Regulations require that its members require in their
merchant agreements that a merchant honor all properly presented Visa cards (cards with the
Visa flag and name on the front, also sometimes referred to as "Visa bank cards") when
cardholders insist on using them as payment for transactions.
3. The first sentence of paragraph 3 does not require an answer. All
allegations in paragraph 3 are denied.
4. Visa denies each allegation, except as expressly admitted or
below. Visa admits that it has advertised to consumers that they may obtain a Visa b-ank card
SNIPPETS:
|
|
5
.
ORDER CERTIFYING CLASS
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
EVID SERV CITE CARD DEFENDANTS CREDIT PLAINTIFFS DEBIT CARDS CLASS ACTION MOTION TYING VISA DAUBERT BANK INTERCHANGE FEES CARLTON TIE MERITS DECLINE CHALLENGING CLASS CERTIFICATION OPINION COURT ANTITRUST INJURY POWER MASTERCARD PURCHASE PRICE |
192 F.R.D. 68
2000-1 Trade Cases P 72,815, 57 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 965
(Cite as: 192 F.R.D. 68)
methodology properly can be
United States District Court, Fed.Rules Evid.Rule 702, 28
E.D. New York. [4] Evidence 555.2
In re VISA CHECK/MASTERMONEY ANTITRUST 157k555.2 Most Cited Cases
LITIGATION. Factors to consider in a
No. 96-CV-5238 (JG). whether the theory can be and
the scientific method; (2)
Feb. 22, 2000. has been subjected to peer
case of a particular
Large retailers, joined by a number of smaller merchants potential error rate; and (4)
and three retail associations, brought antitrust action accepted. Fed.Rules Evid.Rule
challenging rules issued by credit card associations that
required stores accepting their credit cards to also accept [5] Evidence 555.2
their debit cards. On plaintiffs' motion for class certification, 157k555.2 Most Cited Cases
and defendants' motion to strike the opinion of plaintiffs'
expert, the District Court, Gleeson, J., held that: (1) opinion The Daubert gate-keeping
of plaintiffs' economic expert would not be stricken on of a non- scientific expert;
Daubert grounds; (2) plaintiffs met their burden of showing may or may not be applicable;
that injury in fact was susceptible to common proof and that be tied to the facts of a
class treatment was therefore appropriate; (3) plaintiffs 702, 28 U.S.C.A.
established that a class action was superior to any other [6] Federal Civil Procedure
means of adjudication; and (4) suit was maintainable as a 170Ak172 Most Cited Cases
class action under section of class action rule authorizing
class action if injunctive relief is appropriate with respect to Opinion of plaintiff's
the class as a whole. at class certification stage
grounds, where defendants did
Plaintiffs' motion granted; defendants' motion denied. rely upon the type of
West Headnotes and accepted in such cases,
motion was that they and their
[1] Federal Civil Procedure 172 opinion of plaintiff's expert.
170Ak172 Most Cited Cases U.S.C.A.
A court at the class certification stage should not delve into [7] Federal Civil Procedure
the merits of an expert's opinion, or indulge "dueling" 170Ak165 Most Cited Cases
between opposing experts. Class action device is
[2] Evidence 508 involved are common to the
157k508 Most Cited Cases turn on questions of law
each member of the class; in
[2] Evidence 555.2 conserve the resources of both
157k555.2 Most Cited Cases
SNIPPETS:
|
|
6
.
CONSENT ORDER PROVIDING NOTICE
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
VISA COURT ACQUIRERS MASTERCARD MERCHANT CARDS BUSINESS CERTIFIED CLASS LISTS CREDIT CARDS PUBLICATION ADMINISTRATOR SETTLEMENT PENDENCY PLAINTIFFS GCG SUPPLEMENTAL PUBLICATION CONSISTENT TRANSACTIONS UNITED STATES DEFENDANTS GARDEN CITY GROUP BUSINESS ENTITIES ACCEPTED VISA DEBIT CARD ANTITRUST LITIGATION LEGAL NOTICE PROGRAMS NOTICE PROGRAMS CONFIDENTIALITY |
JUN-21-2062 17:22 GLEQSON
P.02114
VISA CHECI(/MASTERMONEY ;
ANTITRIJST LITIGATION MASTER
CV-96-5238
.
This Document Relates To:
ALL ACTIONS (Gleeson,
CONSENT ORDER FOR PROVIDING NOTICE TO MEMBERS
By order dated February 22, 2000, this Court certified a class, purstiant
all persons and business entities who have accepted Visa and/or Mastercard credit
have been required to accept Visa Check and/or MasterMoney
arrangements during the fullest period permitted by the applicable statute of
not include the named Defendants, their directors, officers or members of their
44 (footnote omitted). The applicable stat& of 1.
nmitations period in
to the present (the "class period").
The Court, having considered the parties' submission with respect to the
pioviding notice of the pendency of this action to members of the certified class,
following findings and orders that notice be provided to class members, as set forth
FINDINGS
A. ;Ln order to provide notice of this action to the members of the cetified
a notice plan consisting of individual notice to absent class members whose
ascertained in the manner specified below (see fl 2-13, infix), together with
SNIPPETS:
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
