3 ms·
I thought this was an excellent question. It's easy to argue that the merger shouldn't have been approved, but seems like the plaintiffs want a time machine. Pe
by hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
I thought this was an excellent question. It's easy to argue that the merger shouldn't have been approved, but seems like the plaintiffs want a time machine. Perhaps they're just looking for some sort of financial settlement?
Has there ever been a similar suit against a large merger like this in the past, successful or not? I'm really curious how the legal system views these "please undo the past" requests.
- pasttense01 3y agoNo, it's not the plaintiffs. If successful each subscriber might get a few dollars--while the plaintiffs' lawyers would get millions.
- anonymouskimmer 3y agoHistorically through divestiture or rescission (the later is effectively impossible to do with a publicly held corporation). Though the Clayton Act has only been infrequently applied in recent decades. https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4184&context=clr https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti...