Notable Cases

Notable Cases

Mr. Shapiro has been lead or co-counsel for the prevailing party in a number of significant cases, including Allstate Insurance Co. v. Mugavero, et al., The Trump-Equitable Fifth Avenue Company v. The City of New York, et al., Goodstein-Milstein v. City of New York, Process America v. Cynergy Data, Vaad L’Hafotzas Sichos, Inc. v. Kehot Publication Society, a division of Merkos L’Inyonei Chinuch, Inc., and in several monopolization and conspiracy cases in various state and federal courts, including Concord EFS, Inc. v. Deluxe Data, Inc.; Diskin v. Daily Racing Form, Inc.; Concord EFS, Inc. v. Deluxe Data Systems, Inc.; Solla, et al. v. NYS Health Maintenance Organization Conference, Inc., et al.; Beyer Farms, Inc. v. Elmhurst Dairy, Inc. and most notably Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. et al. v. Visa USA, Inc. and MasterCard International Incorporated (a/k/a In Re VisaCheck/MasterMoney Antitrust Litigation).

In Arnold Chevrolet et a. v. Newsday, Inc. et al, a cased settled at the close of discovery in early 2008, Mr. Shapiro served as co-counsel for the plaintiffs, and the lead antitrust litigator, in bringing a variety of common law fraud and antitrust claims against Newsday and a preferred group of automobile dealers arising out of, inter alia, Newsday’s alleged fraudulent overstatement of its circulation figures (and corresponding advertising rates), Newsday’s alleged attempt to monopolize the market for advertising new automobiles on Long Island.

In Beyer Farms, Inc. v. Elmhurst Dairy, Inc. (a case featured in BNAs Antitrust Reporter), Mr. Shapiro successfully convinced both the district court judge and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to consider his client’s arrangements with its distributors to be part of a “dual-distribution arrangement” and therefore to broadly expand the previously narrow application of this doctrine to justify a dismissal of all claims against his client under the more lenient “rule of reason” standards.

In the matter of In re CD Liquidation (Tribul Merchant Services et al. v. Cynergy Data, LLC, et al), Case No. 09-13038 (KG) (US Bankr Ct De 2011), on the very eve of trial, Shapiro settled an adversary proceeding on behalf of an independent sales organization (“ISO”) that became a bankruptcy creditor when its super-ISO/processor filed for bankruptcy after Mr. Shapiro and his colleagues had successfully sought a TRO in New York State Court compelling the company’s continuing payment of its obligations under the contract in question four months before the filing of the Petition in Bankruptcy that automatically stayed the State Court proceeding.

Business Payment Systems v. National Processing Company, et al [(Fifth Third Merchant Processing/Vantiv], 3:10-cv-669-CRS (Western District of Louisville), is a case similar to the Cynergy lawsuit, in which Mr. Shapiro and his team sought to recover tens of millions of dollars from one of the leading processors/superISOs in the credit and debit card processing market arising out, inter alia, of the alleged improper withholding of commissions, known as residuals in the industry, from independent sales organizations

In Solla et al v. Aetna, et al, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s opinion that the HMOs had not engaged in the alleged violation of the antitrust laws by excluding chiropractors from their managed care networks. In that case, Mr. Shapiro served as co-lead counsel coordinating the discovery efforts and successful summary judgment strategy of eleven defendant HMOs and their various law firms.

In Goodstein-Milstein v. City of New York, a case long-cited for the black letter legal principle that a plaintiff can not seek speculative damages, Mr. Shapiro briefed and argued the appeal that convinced the New York appellate court to overturn the lower court’s ruling and reinstate the case despite the fact that the City of New York argued that the  client’s former law firm’s neglect in allowing the case to lie dormant for years (and then be dismissed) resulted in the unavailability of a key witness and prejudice to the defendant.

In Trump-Equitable v. City of New York, Mr. Shapiro worked on the litigation team that established that the City’s method of real property tax assessment for “mixed-use” buildings like the Trump Tower was improper, and compelled the recovery of over $10 million, at that time still considered a significant recovery.

In the case of Congregation Ahavas Moishe v. Katzoff et al., Mr. Shapiro represented the longstanding members of the Board of the Maple Street Shul in Crown Heights (the only Synagogue that has confirmed ever having received membership dues from the Lubavitcher Rebbe) in resisting attempts by a Cabal of former members and non-members to take over control of the synagogue, its $2 million mortgage free building, its tax identification number and its collection of valuable Torah scrolls. The firm successfully procured a TRO enjoining continuing enforcement, confirmed an arbitration award of a Rabbinical Court (Beis Din) in Kings County Supreme Court, and after a trial that was spread out over the course of two years, received a ruling and significant monetary award against the defendants for their contempt of both the Beis Din ruling and the Court’s initial TRO.

In the case of Domino Development Group LLC (f/k/a Katan Group) v. CPCR et al., handled the appeal of a judge’s dismissal of the claims by minority members of an LLC that the managing member, CPCR, abused its power and failed to maximize profits for the members when it sold the valuable former Domino Sugar Factory property in Williamsburg Brooklyn to Two Trees Development in 2012 for only $180 million, a fraction of the $600 million or more that the property would be worth if it had been marketed and sold to the highest bidder. 

In Vaad L’Hafotzas Sichos, Inc.  et al. v. Kehot Publication Society, a division of Merkos L’Inyonei Chinuch, Inc.,  et al., Mr. Shapiro served as lead trial counsel in  a federal trademark lawsuit (and in litigating a companion copyright lawsuit between the same parties) seeking injunctive relief and $22 million in damages on behalf  of the original publisher of the discourses and teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe (known as the Likkutei Sichos), on behalf of themselves and the entire Chabad-Lubavitcher Chasidic Community.  Mr. Shapiro deposed the leaders of international Chabad movement regarding the manner in which the organizations were governed and operated, and received a key admission at trial regarding the Rebbe’s will that detailed the manner in which the Chabad organizations were to be run in the event that he was no longer able to govern the operations.  After a four day trial, the district court rendered a verdict preserving the Vaad’s right to publish the Likkutei Sichos with the Kehot logo and then confirmed its ruling on post-trial motions.  The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s verdict. 

In Wal-Mart et al. v. Visa and MasterCard (a/k/a In Re VisaCheck/MasterMoney Antitrust Litigation), Mr. Shapiro coordinated the pre-trial discovery, countless motions (including the briefing of the successful class certification motions) and massive class notice (to over 5 million merchants) on behalf of the lead plaintiffs in one of the largest civil actions in history, involving production of more than 5 million documents and approximately 400 depositions (over 500 days) concerning the bankcard associations’ alleged attempt and conspiracy to monopolize the debit card market.  Mr. Shapiro was one of the 4 members of the trial team that also simultaneously mediated and negotiated the largest antitrust settlement in history on the actual morning of trial — with a common fund of over $3 billion and unprecedented injunctive relief (valued at up to $1 billion in 2003 alone and up to $100 billion through 2010).  

(Attorney Advertisement: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome)

Legal Filings