Bankers Trust, Procter & Gamble settle derivatives case
OHIO–In early May, Procter & Gamble and Bankers Trust Corporation settled a $200 million law suit and the federal Court of Appeals in Cincinnati (6th Cir.) refused a request for the full bench to reconsider an appellate panel’s ruling on a protective order between the parties and a restraining order prohibiting Business Week from publishing information in the case.
Procter & Gamble had accused Bankers Trust of a variety of unethical and illegal practices linked to derivative trading.
A panel of the Court of Appeals in Cincinnati (6th Cir.) held in early March that the trial court had erred when it forbade Business Week to publish its article.
Business Week magazine had been barred from publishing an article based on documents subject to a sweeping protective order for several weeks in September and October of 1995. The order had allowed Procter & Gamble and Bankers Trust to stipulate to sealing any pretrial discovery documents if both parties agreed that they contained confidential information. Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires judges to supervise discovery and review any requests for sealings and requires a showing of “good cause.”
The suit, filed by Procter & Gamble in 1994, was scheduled to go to trial in early June. (Procter & Gamble v. Bankers Trust, Business Week; Media Counsel: Victor Kovner, New York)