New York City lawyers Fighting to recover investor losses since 2004
Skyscrapers at midtown New York City with the East River on the background

Case Results

With his former firm, Mr. Gray represented the plaintiffs in a class action in which plaintiffs obtained reportedly the largest recovery ever under the Commodities Exchange Act, $145.35 million. See In re Sumitomo Copper Litig., 194 F.R.D. 480 (S.D.N.Y. 2000) (Pollack, J.) (certifying non-continuous class period of over two years). In 2002, Mr. Gray obtained a $1.01 million jury verdict in an action under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. (Herbert Black v. Finantra Capital, Inc., S.D.N.Y. Docket No. 02-CV-6819 (JSR)).

With his current and former firms, Mr. Gray has represented the plaintiffs in the following reported cases, among others:

Slayton v. American Express Co., 460 F.3d 215 (2d Cir. 2006) (obtaining reversal of U.S. District Judge’s ruling that shareholder class action on behalf of American Express shareholders against company and executive officers was untimely).

Univest Network, LLC v. AT&T Corp., No. 04-CV-9868 (MGC), 2006 WL 1017679 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 19, 2006) (holding that press releases incorporated by reference in prospectus for stock offering are statement deemed to be made as of the date of the prospectus for purposes of liability under Section 11 of Securities Act of 1933).

Sung ex rel. Lazard Ltd. v. Wasserstein, 415 F. Supp. 2d 393 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (remand to Supreme Court of the State of New York granted; state law derivative action was not preempted under Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998).

Berger v. Scharf, No. 600935/05, 2006 WL 825171 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty. March 29, 2006)(denying defendants’ motion to dismiss complaint in shareholder class action).

Black v. Finantra Capital, Inc., 418 F.3d 203 (2d Cir. 2005) (reversing district court’s grant of judgment notwithstanding verdict pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b)).

In re Amaranth Natural Gas Commodities Litigation, F.Supp.2d, 2008 WL 4501247 (S.D.N.Y. October 6, 2008) (denying in part defendants’ motions to dismiss class action alleging massive manipulation of natural gas commodities futures prices by hedge fund during 2006).

In re Merrill Lynch & Co. Research Reports Securities Litigation (Ventura v. Merrill Lynch & Co.), 568 F. Supp. 2d 349 (S.D.N.Y. 2008).

Cox v. Microsoft, 48 A.D.3d 215, 850 N.Y.S.2d 103 (Appellate Division 1st Dep’t 2008).

In re FBR, Inc. Sec. Litig., 544 F. Supp. 2d 346 (S.D.N.Y. 2008).

In re eSpeed Inc Sec. Litig., 232 F.R.D. 95 (S.D.N.Y. 2005).

Multi-Juice, S.A. v. Snapple Beverage Corp., No. 02-CV-4635 (RPP), 2005 WL 1138470 (S.D.N.Y. May 12, 2005).

In re JP Morgan Chase Sec. Litig., 363 F. Supp. 2d 595 (S.D.N.Y. 2005).

In re Natural Gas Commodity Litig., 358 F. Supp. 2d 336 (S.D.N.Y. 2005).

Milano v. Perot Systems Corp., No. 02-CV-1269, 2004 WL 2360031 (N.D. Tex. 2004).

James v. AT&T Corp., 334 F. Supp. 2d 410 (S.D.N.Y. 2004).

In re Electronic Data Sys. Corp. Sec. and ERISA Litig., 298 F. Supp. 2d 544 (E.D. Tex. 2004).

Albert Fadem Trust v. Duke Energy Corp., 214 F. Supp. 2d 314 (S.D.N.Y. 2002).

Butigian v. Port Authority, 266 A.D.2d 133, 699 N.Y.S.2d 41 (1st Dep’t 1999).

To see if you may have a case to recover your financial losses, call or e-mail Christopher J. Gray, P.C. for a confidential, no-cost consultation.