Lapin v. Goldman Sachs Co.

Full title: HARVEY LAPIN Plaintiff, v. GOLDMAN SACHS CO., et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Jul 16, 2010

No. 04 Civ. 2236 (RJS) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 16, 2010)

Opinion

No. 04 Civ. 2236 (RJS).

July 16, 2010

ORDER

RICHARD SULLIVAN, District Judge

The Court is in receipt of the parties' July 12, 2010 submission including a proposed settlement agreement and release, proposed notice, and proposed summary notice in this action. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall make an additional submission, to be received no later than July 30, 2010, explaining why the settlement agreement is "fair, adequate, and reasonable, and not a product of collusion." Joel A. v. Giuliani, 218 F.3d 132, 138-39 (2d Cir. 2000). The parties' submission shall include a sworn statement regarding why the settlement agreement resulted from arm's-length negotiations. Additionally, the parties' submission shall contain a revised, proposed notice that meets the PLSRA's requirement that notice contain a "[s]tatement of potential outcome of [the] case." 15 U.S.C. §§ 78u- 4(a)(7)(B); see also In re Global Crossing Securities and ERISA Litigation, 225 F.R.D. 436, 449 (S.D.N.Y. 2004).

SO ORDERED.