Laydon v. Mizuho Bank, Ltd. et al., No. 12-cv-03419 (S.D.N.Y.) involves allegations that numerous financial institutions conspired to manipulate the Yen London Interbank Offered Rate (“Yen-LIBOR”) and the Euroyen Tokyo Interbank Offered Rate (“TIBOR”) to financially benefit their derivatives positions. Multiple Defendants have pleaded guilty to criminal charges of price-fixing and paid billions in fines to regulators for this misconduct. Further, Defendant UBS AG was granted conditional leniency from the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) under the Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act (“ACPERA”) for admitting to anticompetitive conduct in the Euroyen market. The case is currently pending before Judge Daniels.
Sullivan et al. v. Barclays PLC et al., No. 13-cv-2811 (S.D.N.Y.) alleges that banks responsible for setting the Euro Interbank Offered Rate (“Euribor”) conspired to fix Euribor-based derivatives prices to financially benefit their own trading positions. Defendants named in the lawsuit have paid billions in fines, including to the DOJ, European Commission (“EC”), and U.K. Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”). They have also received conditional leniency under ACPERA and the equivalent EC programs for their admitted anticompetitive conduct in the Euribor market. The case is currently pending before Judge Castel.
Sonterra Capital Master Fund Ltd. et al. v. Credit Suisse Group AG et al., No. 15-cv-0871 (S.D.N.Y.) alleges that numerous global financial institutions conspired to fix the prices of financial derivatives priced based on the London Interbank Offered Rate for the Swiss Franc (“Swiss Franc LIBOR”). Defendants named in the lawsuit have settled with global regulators, paid billions in fines, and been granted leniency by the EC for engaging in anticompetitive conduct in the Swiss Franc LIBOR derivatives market. This includes an unlawful agreement to fix artificially wider bid-ask spreads in the over-the-counter market. Lowey Dannenberg was appointed sole interim class counsel in May 2015. The case is currently pending before Judge Stein.
Sonterra Capital Master Fund Ltd., et al. v. Barclays Bank PLC, et al., No. 15-cv-03538 (S.D.N.Y.) involves claims against numerous financial institutions that allegedly conspired to manipulate the Sterling London Interbank Offered Rate (“Sterling LIBOR”) for their financial benefit. Defendants named in the action have already settled with multiple government regulators including the DOJ, CFTC, and FCA. The case is currently pending before Judge Broderick.
Frontpoint Asian Event Driven Fund et al. v. Citibank N.A., et al., No. 16-cv-05263 (S.D.N.Y.) encompasses claims arising out of the alleged manipulation of the Singapore Interbank Offered Rate (“SIBOR”) and Singapore Swap Offer Rate (“SOR”), two benchmarks used to measure the cost of borrowing Singapore dollars. Multiple financial regulators, including the Monetary Authority of Singapore, have already found that Defendants named in the action made false submissions to manipulate those rates for their financial benefit. The case is currently pending before Judge Hellerstein.
Dennis et al. v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. et al., No. 16-cv-6496 alleges that financial institutions responsible for setting the Australian dollar Bank Bill Swap Rate (“BBSW”) conspired to manipulate that rate to financially benefit their derivatives trading positions. Defendants in the case have entered settlements with the Australian Securities Investment and Commission admitting to the alleged misconduct. The case is currently pending before Judge Kaplan.
Mr. Girnys also worked on the amicus curiae brief filed by Lowey Dannenberg on behalf of the New York State Common Retirement Fund, the New York City Pension Funds, and the New York State Teachers’ Retirement System in the New York Court of Appeals in Assured Guar. (UK) Ltd. v. J.P. Morgan Inv. Management Inc. (Dec. 20, 2011). In that successful outcome, the Court of Appeals held that New York’s Blue Sky law, the Martin Act, does not pre-empt investors from asserting common law causes of action. Assured Guar. (UK) Ltd. v. J.P. Morgan Inv. Mgmt. Inc., 18 N.Y.3d 341 (2011).
Mr. Girnys contributed to “Don’t Bend ‘American Pipe’” New York Law Journal, November 7, 2012 as well as co-authored “NECA-IBEW Health & Welfare Fund v. Goldman Sachs & Co.: The Implications on Class Standing and Why We Should Think About Amici Support Now,” The NAPPA Report, Vol. 26, Number 4, November 2012. Mr. Girnys also co-authored “No Antitrust Injury in Libor Rate-Setting?—What Happened to Effects,” Competition Policy International, May 30, 2013.
At law school, Mr. Girnys served as an Articles Editor of the New York Law School Law Review. He was a John Marshall Harlan Scholar affiliated with the Center on Business Law & Policy and served as an Associate in the Center on Financial Services Law.
B.A. The University of Scranton (2008), magna cum laude
J.D. New York Law School (2011), summa cum laude
New York, New Jersey, and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
More than 50 years of landmark results.