The plaintiffs objected to the notice to consumers and terms of a proposed settlement between Nintendo and the fifty state attorneys general over a national antitrust action. The court found that the content of the notice to consumers of the proposed settlement met the notice requirements under antitrust legislation. In addition, the court held that the plaintiff's objection against the terms of the proposed settlement offer was premature as the fairness and adequacy of the offer would be considered once the parties sought final approval of the offer.
New York ex rel. Abrams v. Nintendo of America, Inc.
1991, US Dist. Ct., SD NY
1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10426 Summary by Chris Metcalfe