As a result of the First Circuit’s January 20, 2011 opinion, the plaintiffs in the Nomura Asset Acceptance Corporation mortgage-backed securities lawsuit have managed to revive a slender portion of their case, albeit on a rather precarious basis. The First Circuit otherwise affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the remainder of their case.
The
In the past week, plaintiffs’ lawyers filed a raft of new subprime and credit crisis related securities lawsuits. The cases involve a wide variety of claimants and defendants, and a diverse array of legal theories. But while the lawsuits themselves are diverse, they do all evidence a common theme, which is that the subprime and
Regular readers know that I have been tracking subprime-related class-action lawsuits (here). In a recent post, I noted my interest in trying to develop a similar list of subprime-related derivative lawsuits. In response to my request, a number of readers supplied helpful information, and as a result I have been able to develop
New York Subprime Lawsuit Between Two Foreign Banks: As I noted in prior posts (most recently here), mortgage-backed securities investors have already initiated several lawsuits against the investment banks and others that created the securities, some lawsuits filed as individual actions and some as class actions. A mortgage-backed securities investor’s individual lawsuit initiated this week
On February 27, 2007, plaintiffs’ lawyers’ initiated a securities class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Swiss Reinsurance Company, the world’s largest reinsurance company, and certain of its directors and officers. A copy of the plaintiffs’ lawyers’ press release can be found here and
In prior posts (here and here), I noted two subprime securities lawsuit rulings in which defendants’ motions to dismiss were granted with leave to amend. But in a January 4, 2008 order (here) in the Accredited Home subprime-related securities lawsuit pending in the United States District Court for the Central District of
Doomsday estimates of subprime related write-downs of as much as $400 billion, at a time when current Wall Street losses are “only” around $120 billion, beg the question of where the rest of these losses are. Undoubtedly, some part of these as yet unannounced losses will be revealed in many financial institutions’ upcoming earnings releases, as
The subprime meltdown has already provoked a wave of shareholder lawsuits (as detailed here), in which public company shareholders have alleged subprime-related misrepresentations or omissions that shareholders contend inflated the companies’ share price. But the plaintiffs in an unusual class action securities lawsuit recently filed in Massachusetts state court are not public company shareholders
On February 7, 2007, New Century Financial Corp. became the first company to be named in subprime-related securities lawsuit. On January 31, 2008, just short of one year later, Judge Dean Pregerson of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss, but without prejudice and
On February 12, 2008, a plaintiff initiated a securities class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Central District of California relating to Morgan Stanley’s subprime-related woes. The complaint (here) purports to be filed on behalf of a class of persons who purchased Morgan Stanley’s shares between July 10, 2007
