Greenwald, Elyse

Elyse M. Greenwald

Counsel

elyse.greenwald@lw.com
    Greenwald, Elyse

    Elyse M. Greenwald

    Counsel

    elyse.greenwald@lw.com

    Profile

    Elyse Greenwald defends leading corporate clients in complex civil antitrust litigation in state and federal courts across the US.

    Elyse draws on extensive experience spanning multiple industries to help clients navigate complex commercial and antitrust litigation matters — including multidistrict litigation, class actions, and strategic business-to-business litigation — involving claims of:

    • Monopolization and attempted monopolization
    • Monopsonization
    • Price-fixing
    • Conspiracy
    • Refusal to deal
    • Predatory pricing
    • Fraud
    • State unfair competition laws

    She has achieved significant victories for clients at every stage of litigation, including through dispositive motion practice, at trial, and through settlement.

    A recognized leader at the firm, Elyse serves on the WEB Committee.

    Elyse maintains a robust pro bono practice, including partnering with the Boston chapters of the ACLU, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights, and NAACP LDF to challenge a Boston-area charter school’s discriminatory grooming policy. She also regularly represents clients in immigration proceedings.

    Before joining the firm, Elyse clerked for Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr. in the Eastern District of California and externed for Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero in the Northern District of California.

    Experience

    Elyse's matters include representing:

    • U.S. Sugar in a federal bench trial in the District of Delaware, in defense of a complaint brought by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to block U.S. Sugar’s proposed acquisition of Imperial Sugar Company under section 7 of the Clayton Act
    • CoStar Group against antitrust counterclaims brought by competitor Commercial Real Estate Exchange (CREXi), including monopolization and attempted monopolization of the markets for online commercial real estate information and listings, in which the district court granted CoStar’s motion to dismiss CREXi’s antitrust counterclaims with leave to amend
    • Ocean Spray Cranberries, in defense of an antitrust class action brought by cranberry growers; the court dismissed 10 of the 13 counts against Ocean Spray, denied plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, and granted Ocean Spray’s motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs’ monopolization claim
    • Surescripts, a pioneer of electronic prescribing, in securing a settlement with no monetary penalties in a US Federal Trade Commission lawsuit alleging monopolization of e-prescription markets through allegedly exclusionary contracts, as well as follow-on civil class action brought by classes of pharmacies
    • General Electric and GE Healthcare in a putative antitrust class action in which the plaintiffs alleged that GE monopolized the aftermarket for anesthesia services; Latham secured a confidential settlement following a successful motion to compel mediation
    • Cox Media Group in a complex multidistrict litigation alleging price fixing and information exchange violations arising out of a DOJ investigation into local television advertising sales practices
    • Ford Motor Company in an antitrust consumer class action brought under California’s Cartwright Act in the Complex Litigation Department of the San Francisco Superior Court
    • Olam Peanut Shelling Company, Olam International’s US subsidiary, against price-fixing allegations brought in the Eastern District of Virginia; the matter settled favorably prior to trial
    • Oracle and NetSuite, in a weeklong federal jury trial in the Northern District of California, defending against claims of fraud brought by a former NetSuite customer; after excluding the plaintiff’s damages expert before trial, the jury returned a complete defense verdict for Oracle and NetSuite after deliberating for little more than an hour
    • Oracle in a putative class action in the Northern District of California in which the plaintiffs alleged that Oracle entered into agreements with other technology companies not to hire or solicit each other’s employees in violation of section 1 of the Sherman Act and California law; the court granted Oracle’s motion to dismiss with prejudice

    Qualifications

    Bar Qualification

    • California
    • Massachusetts

    Education

    • JD, University of Michigan, 2009
      magna cum laude, Order of the Coif
    • BA, Stanford University, 2004

    Practices

    Recognition

    Facade FlagsJustice Department Building Pennsylvania Avenue Washington DC Completed in 1935. Houses 1000s of lawyers working at Justice.
    July 26, 2023 Recognition

    Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout Outs

    Latham team recognized as appellate court affirms previous decisions against the US Department of Justice's challenge to U.S. Sugar's purchase of Imperial Sugar.

    Read More

    News & Insights

    Business building reflections
    June 2, 2023 In the News

    Real Estate Co. Must Face CoStar's Revived Copyright Claims

    A California federal judge on Friday resuscitated two of CoStar's copyright allegations against a rival real estate company that the court previously axed with prejudice and allowed back in an amended suit, ruling that the new pleadings are enough to state a claim.
    Read More