There has been plenty to talk about following Citigroup's massive $2.65 billion settlement in the WorldCom securities litigation. This partial settlement (the case continues against numerous defendants) is by itself the second-largest securities class action settlement in history (trailing only the Cendant settlement). The Wall Street Journal had this article putting the case in perspective and featuring a chart with SCAS data on other large tentative settlements. The New York Times had this article analyzing the settlement in detail and noting recent claims by plaintiffs in the WorldCom case of

new materials discovered by the plaintiff relating to Mr. Grubman's analysis of WorldCom and the acknowledgment by high-level Citigroup officials of the conflicts inherent in providing accurate research to investors and generating rich investment banking revenue for the firm.

For example, in an April 12, 2004, brief submitted to the appeals court, lawyers for Mr. Hevesi noted that they had amassed "compelling evidence" demonstrating that Mr. Grubman had manipulated the underlying financial analyses he used to value WorldCom stock to justify his buy rating on it.

The brief also noted that the "most senior officers of Salomon" acknowledged privately that its investment bankers pressured its analysts to avoid negative ratings and that "providing accurate stock ratings conflicted with Salomon's paramount goals of securing investment banking business." Citigroup had never produced the materials supporting these claims to Richard Thornburgh, the examiner appointed by the bankruptcy court to investigate the WorldCom fraud, the brief stated.

The NYT article also featured an interesting chart that contrasted the $100 million in fees earned by Citigroup from WorldCom since 1996 with the $2.65 billion settlement.