One of the important and recurring issues under the federal securities laws is the question of whether or not American Pipe tolling applies to the statute of repose in the securities laws’ liability provisions. Specifically, the question is whether or not the three-year limitations period in Section 13 of the ’33 Act may be tolled (under a legal theory known as the American Pipe tolling doctrine) by the filing of a putative securities class action, or rather that the three-year provision cannot be tolled. As discussed here, the U.S. Supreme Court recently dismissed the cert petition in the Indy Mac case, leaving standing a Second Circuit ruling in that case that the filing of a securities class action lawsuit does not toll the ’33 Act’s statute of repose.
In the following guest post, the attorneys from the Paul Weiss law firm take a look at two recent Second Circuit decisions that raised these questions of tolling under the ’33 Act’s statute of repose. As discussed below, the authors conclude that the Second Circuit’s most recent decisions suggest that statutes of repose generally—and not simply statutes of repose established under the federal securities laws—are immune to tolling.
I would like to thank the attorneys at the Paul Weiss firm for allowing me to publish their guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is the Paul Weiss attorneys’ guest post. Continue Reading Guest Post: Second Circuit Expands the IndyMac Rule
In the latest development in the long-running battle of J.P. Morgan Chase, as successor in interest to Bear Stearns, to try to obtain insurance coverage for amounts Bear Stearns paid to resolve an SEC investigation of alleged deceptive market timing and late trading activities, a New York state court judge has held that because its D&O insurers had “effectively disclaimed coverage,” Bear Stearns was excused from its policy obligation to obtain the insurers’ consent prior to its settlement with the SEC. However, the court declined to resolve the question of whether or not the settlements were “reasonable.” The now years-long insurance coverage battle will continue to go forward on the remaining issues. A copy of July 7, 2016 of New York (New York County) Supreme Court 
Securities class action lawsuit filings in the first half of 2016 leapt to their highest level in years, according to a recent report from Cornerstone Research. According to the report, which is entitled “Securities Class Action Filings: 2016 Midyear Assessment,” both the number of lawsuit filings and the rate of litigation were well above long-term historical semiannual averages in the first six months of 2016. The increases are attributable in part to the increase in federal court M&A-related securities litigation, as discussed below. The report can be found 
In a June 6, 2016 opinion (
One of the Dodd-Frank Act’s signature features was its creation of potentially massive bounties for whistleblowers that reported financial fraud to the SEC. During the time that the Dodd-Frank whistleblower program has been in place, the agency has made 
The D&O Diary was on assignment in Europe this past week for meetings in Germany, with a brief stopover in Austria before returning home. The picture to the left was taken during our short visit to Salzburg, Austria, which is described below. The trip’s main event was a series of meetings in Munich with industry colleagues at Munich Re. The company’s beautiful Munich headquarters building on Königinstraße, opposite the main entrance of the Englischer Garten, is pictured below. 
he D&O Diary’s readers cover a lot of ground and have an incredible diversity of interests, if the latest round of Frisbee photos is any indication. Readers may recall that in connection with The D&O Diary’s recent 
One of the bedrock principles of our legal system is that criminal liability attaches only to those who act with intent or knowledge – that is, as the legal scholars say, with mens rea (or a guilty mind). The “
There have been few more powerful forces acting recently on the litigation environment around the world than third-party litigation financing. The recent rise of litigation funding, often accompanied by the active involvement of U.S. law firms, is changing the face of litigation in numerous countries. The collective action to be filed against MasterCard later this summer in the U.K. by U.S. law firm Quinn Emanuel, in an initiative being financed by Chicago-based litigation funding firm Gerchen Keller Capital LLC, is the latest and highest profile example of this trends. Indeed, the anticipated MasterCard action in some ways reflects the coming together of many of the important global litigation trends, as discussed below. The Quinn Emanuel law firm’s July 2016 press release about the planned lawsuit can be found