McKinsey wins dismissal of Jay Alix's lawsuit over bankruptcy conflicts
Recasts; expands comment from Jay Alix's lawyer; adds McKinsey comment, details from decision, discussion of federal anti-racketeering law
Judge says Jay Alix lacked standing to sue under RICO
Alix says McKinsey hid tie to lenders, clients' rivals
McKinsey denies accusations, calls them meritless
By Jonathan Stempel
NEW YORK, July 3 (Reuters) -A U.S. judge dismissed turnaround specialist Jay Alix's lawsuit accusing consulting giant McKinsey & Co of misleading bankruptcy courts about conflicts of interest when seeking permission to perform lucrative work on corporate restructurings.
U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman in Manhattan said Alix lacked standing to sue under the federal Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO") because AlixPartners, the consulting firm he founded and partially owns, never assigned him that right.
"Alix has no one to blame but himself - or perhaps AlixPartners," Furman wrote in a 34-page decision on Wednesday.
The decision follows six years of often bitter litigation between Alix and one of his most powerful rivals, including a successful appeal by Alix in 2022 of an earlier dismissal.
"We're disappointed in Judge Furman's decision, and respectfully disagree with it," Jay Alix's lawyer, Sean O'Shea, said. "This is a nonsubstantive ruling on the case, and we fully expect the (appeals court) to see our way again."
'CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE' ALLEGED
Alix accused McKinsey of running a "criminal enterprise" by hiding its ties to lenders and competitors of its clients.
He said these conflicts should have disqualified McKinsey from 13 bankruptcies including American Airlines AAL.O, food retailer Harry & David and coal producer Alpha Natural Resources, and potentially cost AlixPartners some assignments.
Alix also accused McKinsey of running a "pay-to-play" scheme in which McKinsey would arrange meetings between its consulting clients and bankruptcy lawyers, if those lawyers would refer their bankruptcy clients to McKinsey for restructuring work.
RICO lets people sue if they believe criminal enterprises caused them harm. Alix had sought triple damages.
McKinsey said in a statement: "We have said for years that Jay Alix's accusations are entirely meritless and we are glad the case has once again been dismissed."
AlixPartners was not a party to the case. The New York-based firm and its lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
'NO MERE TECHNICALITY'
Alix's assignment let him pursue claims against McKinsey over "illegal competitive activity in the crisis management and consulting business involving major bankruptcy cases."
But the judge said "illegal competitive activity" refers naturally to antitrust claims, and said the assignment did not mention RICO or terms such as racketeering and organized crime.
Furman said it was unclear whether the drafting was simply careless, or whether Alix and AlixPartners "tried to play fast and loose" by shielding AlixPartners from the burdens of litigation while preserving its ability to sue later.
The result "may smack of a technicality - especially in light of the lengthy history of this litigation," the judge wrote. "But it is no mere technicality."
Furman said the assignment did not surface in the litigation until January of this year, which explains why he did not rule on its validity sooner.
Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York
Editing by Matthew Lewis
免責聲明: XM Group提供線上交易平台的登入和執行服務，允許個人查看和/或使用網站所提供的內容，但不進行任何更改或擴展其服務和訪問權限，並受以下條款與條例約束：（i）條款與條例；（ii）風險提示；（iii）完全免責聲明。網站內部所提供的所有資訊，僅限於一般資訊用途。請注意，我們所有的線上交易平台內容並不構成，也不被視為進入金融市場交易的邀約或邀請 。金融市場交易會對您的投資帶來重大風險。
所有缐上交易平台所發佈的資料，僅適用於教育/資訊類用途，不包含也不應被視爲適用於金融、投資稅或交易相關諮詢和建議，或是交易價格紀錄，或是任何金融商品或非應邀途徑的金融相關優惠的交易邀約或邀請。
本網站的所有XM和第三方所提供的内容，包括意見、新聞、研究、分析、價格其他資訊和第三方網站鏈接，皆爲‘按原狀’，並作爲一般市場評論所提供，而非投資建議。請理解和接受，所有被歸類為投資研究範圍的相關内容，並非爲了促進投資研究獨立性，而根據法律要求所編寫，而是被視爲符合營銷傳播相關法律與法規所編寫的内容。請確保您已詳讀並完全理解我們的非獨立投資研究提示和風險提示資訊，相關詳情請點擊 這裡查看。
