1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 676 F.Supp.
  5. 676 F.Supp. 486 (1987)
 

MINPECO, S.A. v. CONTICOMMODITY SERVICES, INC.

No. 81 Civ. 7619 (MEL).

676 F.Supp. 486 (1987)

MINPECO, S.A., Plaintiff, v. CONTICOMMODITY SERVICES, INC., Conticapital Management, Inc., Conticapital Limited, Norton Waltuch, Nelson Bunker Hunt, Lamar Hunt, William Herbert Hunt, International Metals Investment Co., Ltd., Sheik Mohammed Aboud Al-Amoudi, Sheik Ali Bin Mussalem, Naji Robert Nahas, Gilion Financial, Inc., ACLI International Commodity Services, Inc., Banque Populaire Suisse, Advicorp Advisory and Financial Corporation, S.A., Mahmoud Fustok, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., Bache Halsey Stuart Shields, Inc., E.F. Hutton & Company, Inc., Commodity Exchange Inc., the Board of Trade of the City of Chicago, Continental Company, and Walter Goldschmidt, Defendants.

United States District Court, S.D. New York.

December 22, 1987.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Cole & Corette, Washington, D.C. for plaintiff Minpeco, S.A.; Mark A. Cymrot, of counsel.

Kaye, Scholer, Fierman, Hays & Handler, New York City, Gardere & Wynn, Dallas, Tex., for defendants Nelson Bunker, William Herbert and Lamar Hunt; Robert E. Wolin, Dallas, Tex., Aaron Rubinstein, Fred A. Freund, Robert B. Bernstein, Stanley D. Robinson, New York City, of counsel.

Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle, New York City, for defendant Mahmoud Fustok; Herbert Stoller, Turner P. Smith, of counsel.

Rogers & Wells, New York City, for defendants ACLI Intern. Commodity Services, Inc., and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc.; William R. Glendon, of counsel.

Debevoise & Plimpton, New York City, for defendant ACLI Intern. Commodity Services, Inc.; Andrew C. Hartzell, Jr., of counsel.

Sullivan & Cromwell, New York City, for defendants Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc. and Bache Group Inc.; Richard H. Klapper, of counsel.

Finley Kumble, Wagner Heine, Underberg, Manley Myerson & Casey, Washington, D.C., for defendant Intern. Metals Inv. Co., Ltd.

LASKER, District Judge.

Various defendants1 move for summary judgment on all of plaintiff Minpeco's damage claims on the ground that Minpeco has failed to prove actual damages because its damage calculations do not take into account the extent to which Minpeco benefitted from defendants' allegedly manipulative behavior. The motion is granted in part and otherwise denied.2

Minpeco's Damage Claims

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases