Get 40% Off
🤯 Perficient is up a mind-blowing 53%. Our ProPicks AI saw the buying opportunity in March.Read full update

U.S. confident its $5 billion S&P lawsuit was not retaliation

Published 08/25/2014, 05:19 PM
Updated 08/25/2014, 05:20 PM
© Reuters A view shows the Standard & Poor's building in New York's financial district

By Jonathan Stempel

(Reuters) - The United States, which is suing Standard & Poor's for $5 billion over its credit ratings, said on Monday it is confident that documents the rating agency wants for its defense will not show that the lawsuit was filed in retaliation for a downgrade of the country's debt.

In a filing with the U.S. District Court in Santa Ana, California, the U.S. Department of Justice said S&P's "general suspicions" do not justify the rating agency's request for the release of dozens of unredacted documents, including materials from former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

The Justice Department said it has submitted documents sought by S&P to U.S. District Judge David Carter, and is "confident" that his review will prove they "do not support the defendants' allegations of retaliation in any way."

Indeed, the Justice Department added in a footnote, "The United States believes that the redacted information in certain of these documents would affirmatively rebut S&P's claims."

Other material was redacted because it was privileged or irrelevant, the government said.

Catherine Mathis, an S&P spokeswoman, declined to comment. A hearing is set for Sept. 9.

S&P, a unit of New York-based McGraw Hill Financial Inc, has said the government singled it out for a lawsuit after it took away the United States' "triple-A" rating on Aug. 5, 2011.

The $5 billion lawsuit filed in February 2013 accused S&P of issuing inflated ratings before the 2008 financial crisis to win more fees from issuers, and failing to downgrade debt backed by mortgage-backed securities fast enough.

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

Harold McGraw, the chairman of McGraw Hill, has said Geithner angrily told him on Aug. 8, 2011, three days after the downgrade, that the downgrade was based on a "huge" math error, and that the company would be held "accountable."

S&P has said its ratings are opinions protected by the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment. It is represented by Floyd Abrams, a leading First Amendment specialist.

The case is U.S. v. McGraw-Hill Cos et al, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, No. 13-00779.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; editing by Matthew Lewis)

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.