Is There Implied Immunity from the Antitrust Laws for Conduct Permitted by the Federal Securities Laws?
Credit Suisse First Boston asks the Court to decide whether certain collaborative conduct that is authorized under the securities laws is impliedly immune from the antitrust laws. In the case, the plaintiff filed a class action against several investment banks that had underwritten initial public offerings (IPOs) of securities, alleging that they had violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act by agreeing to require consideration from their customers in addition to the underwriters’ discount in exchange for allocations of shares of IPOs of certain high-technology companies. The plaintiffs also alleged an agreement among the defendants to inflate the aftermarket prices of those securities. The district court dismissed the plaintiffs’ complaint on the grounds that the defendants had implied immunity from the antitrust laws by virtue of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) authority to regulate IPO allocation and underwriter commission practices, and that the SEC permitted much of the
