Apple anti-trust plaintiffs want summary judgment on damages, trial to stay where it is

Andrew Albanese at Publishers Weekly has details on the plaintiffs’ latest filings in the Apple anti-trust case. In brief, the attorneys argue that Judge Cote has enough evidence to decide on Apple’s damages in summary judgment, without needing a trial. It’s already a well-established fact that consumers were harmed; the only question is how much the damages should be, and most experts, including Apple’s own, tend to come pretty close to the same figure on those.

They also reject Apple’s request to separate the trials and move them back to their original venues. It’s too late in the game for such a request, they say, given that all parties had already agreed on holding the case in New York, and the court had already put a great amount of time and effort into hearing it. And they touch on the argument that Judge Cote is biased only long enough to reject that, too.

Of course, these are just the motions. Judge Cote will have to decide how to proceed. Apple is facing between $697 and $840 million in damages—less than a quarter of 1% of the corporation’s $473 billion market capitalization.

1 Comment on Apple anti-trust plaintiffs want summary judgment on damages, trial to stay where it is

  1. It is not surprising that the state attorneys general involved in this case would have this opinion. They want the money and they want it sooner rather than later. Obviously, Apple’s concerns go well beyond the dollars involved. Otherwise, they would have settled like the publishers did.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

*



wordpress analytics