Vallejo Sanitation & Flood Control Dist. v. Fuld (In re Lehman Bros. Sec. & Erisa Litig.)

Decision Date15 October 2012
Docket NumberNo. 09 MD 2017(LAK).,09 MD 2017(LAK).
Citation903 F.Supp.2d 152
PartiesIn re LEHMAN BROTHERS SECURITIES AND ERISA LITIGATION. This Document Applies to: Vallejo Sanitation and Flood Control District v. Fuld, et al., 09 Civ. 6040(LAK) Monterey County Treasurer, on Behalf of the Monterey County Investment Pool v. Fuld, et al., 09 Civ.1944(LAK) Contra Costa Water District v. Fuld, 09 Civ. 6652(LAK) City of Burbank v. Fuld, 09 Civ. 3475(LAK) City of San Buenaventura v. Fuld, 09 Civ. 3476(LAK) City of Auburn v. Fuld, 09 Civ. 3474(LAK) The San Mateo County Investment Pool v. Fuld, 09 Civ. 1239(LAK) Zenith Insurance Co. v. Fuld, 09 Civ. 1238(LAK).
CourtU.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Joseph W. Cotchett, Jordanna G. Thigpen, Mark C. Molumphy, Nanci E. Nishimura, Imiatz A. Siddiqui, Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, for Plaintiffs.

Martin J. Auerbach, Law Offices of Martin J. Auerbach, Esq., James G. Kreissman, for Defendant Ian Lowitt.

Mitchell A. Lowenthal, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, for Underwriter Defendants Except HVB Capital Markets, Inc. and M.R. Beal & Co.

Mark P. Ressler, Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman, LLP, for Defendant HVB Capital Markets, Inc.

Simpson Thatcher & Bartlett LLP, for Defendants Richard S. Fuld, Jr., Joseph M. Gregory, Erin Callan, Ian Lowitt, John F. Akers, Roger S. Berlind, Marsha Johnson Evans, Roland A. Hernandez, and Henry Kaufman.

Andrew J. Levander, Kathleen N. Massey, Adam J. Wasserman, Dechert LLP, for Defendants John F. Akers, Roger S. Berlind, Marsha Johnson Evans, Roland A. Hernandez, and Henry Kaufman.

Jamie L. Wine, Latham & Watkins LLP, for Defendant Ernst & Young LLP.

Joseph A. Mendola, M.R. Beal & Company, for Defendant M.R. Beal & Co.

Guy Petrillo, Joshua Klein, Petrillo Klein & Boxer LLP, for Defendant Christopher M. O'Meara.

Joshua J. Pollack, Proskauer Rose LLP, Alfred U. Pavlis, Finn Dixon & Herling LLP, for Defendant Erin Callan.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

LEWIS A. KAPLAN, District Judge.

+-----------------+
                ¦Table of Contents¦
                +-----------------¦
                ¦                 ¦
                +-----------------+
                
+----------------------------------+
                ¦Background                    ¦164¦
                +------------------------------+---¦
                ¦                              ¦   ¦
                +----------------------------------+
                
+------------------------------------+
                ¦  ¦I.¦Parties                   ¦164¦
                +------------------------------------+
                
+------------------------------------------+
                ¦  ¦  ¦A.¦Plaintiffs                  ¦164 ¦
                +--+--+--+----------------------------+----¦
                ¦  ¦  ¦B.¦Defendants                  ¦164 ¦
                +------------------------------------------+
                
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦   ¦    ¦                                                    ¦      ¦
                +---+----+----------------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦   ¦II. ¦The CFAC                                            ¦166   ¦
                +---+----+----------------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦   ¦    ¦                                                    ¦      ¦
                +---+----+----------------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦   ¦III.¦Motions to Dismiss                                  ¦166   ¦
                +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
                
+----------------------------------+
                ¦                              ¦   ¦
                +------------------------------+---¦
                ¦Discussion                    ¦167¦
                +----------------------------------+
                
+----------------------------------------------------+
                ¦   ¦   ¦                                       ¦    ¦
                +---+---+---------------------------------------+----¦
                ¦   ¦I. ¦Legal Standard                         ¦167 ¦
                +---+---+---------------------------------------+----¦
                ¦   ¦   ¦                                       ¦    ¦
                +---+---+---------------------------------------+----¦
                ¦   ¦II.¦Securities Act Claims                  ¦170 ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------+
                
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦   ¦    ¦A.  ¦Timeliness                                        ¦170   ¦
                +---+----+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦   ¦    ¦B.  ¦The Sufficiency of the Remaining Section 11 Claims¦172   ¦
                +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
                
+------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦   ¦   ¦   ¦1.¦Legal Standards                   ¦172 ¦
                +---+---+---+--+----------------------------------+----¦
                ¦   ¦   ¦   ¦2.¦The Present Case                  ¦172 ¦
                +------------------------------------------------------+
                
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦   ¦a. ¦Alleged Misstatements and Omissions Dismissed¦172   ¦
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦   ¦   ¦in the E/D Class Action                      ¦      ¦
                +----+----+----+---+---+---------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦   ¦   ¦Viability in this Case of Alleged            ¦      ¦
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦   ¦b. ¦Misstatements and Omissions Upheld as        ¦177   ¦
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦   ¦   ¦Sufficient in the E/D Class Action           ¦      ¦
                +----+----+----+---+---+---------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦   ¦c. ¦Section 11 Claims against Callan             ¦180   ¦
                +----+----+----+---+---+---------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦   ¦d. ¦Section 11 Claims against Ernst & Young      ¦180   ¦
                +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
                
+------------------------------------------+
                ¦  ¦  ¦C.¦Section 15 Claims           ¦183 ¦
                +------------------------------------------+
                
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦   ¦    ¦                                                    ¦      ¦
                +---+----+----------------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦   ¦III.¦Exchange Act Claims                                 ¦183   ¦
                +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
                
+----------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦   ¦   ¦A. ¦10b–5 Claim as to the Officer Defendants¦183  ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------------+
                
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦1. ¦Existence of Materially False and Misleading      ¦183   ¦
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦   ¦Statements or Omissions                           ¦      ¦
                +----+----+----+---+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦2. ¦Scienter                                          ¦184   ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
                
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦   ¦a. ¦Motive and Opportunity                       ¦184   ¦
                +----+----+----+---+---+---------------------------------------------+------¦
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦   ¦b. ¦Circumstantial Evidence of Conscious         ¦184   ¦
                ¦    ¦    ¦    ¦   ¦   ¦Misbehavior or Recklessness                  ¦      ¦
                +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
                
+------------------------------------------+
                ¦  ¦  ¦B.¦Section 20(a) Claims        ¦189 ¦
                +------------------------------------------+
                
+----------------------------------------------------+
                ¦   ¦   ¦                                       ¦    ¦
                +---+---+---------------------------------------+----¦
                ¦   ¦IV.¦Common Law Claims                      ¦189 ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------+
                
+------------------------------------------+
                ¦  ¦  ¦A.¦Governing Law               ¦189 ¦
                +--+--+--+----------------------------+----¦
                ¦  ¦  ¦B.¦Fraud                       ¦190 ¦
                +--+--+--+----------------------------+----¦
                ¦  ¦  ¦C.¦Aiding and Abetting Fraud   ¦191 ¦
                +--+--+--+----------------------------+----¦
                ¦  ¦  ¦D.¦Negligent Misrepresentation ¦192 ¦
                +------------------------------------------+
                
+----------------------------------------------------+
                ¦   ¦   ¦                                       ¦    ¦
                +---+---+---------------------------------------+----¦
                ¦   ¦V. ¦The Fraudulent Conveyance Claim        ¦192 ¦
                +---+---+---------------------------------------+----¦
                ¦   ¦   ¦                                       ¦    ¦
                +---+---+---------------------------------------+----¦
                ¦   ¦VI.¦California Corporations Code Claims    ¦193 ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------+
                
+------------------------------------------+
                ¦  ¦  ¦A.¦Sections 25400 and 25500    ¦193 ¦
                +------------------------------------------+
                
+-------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦   ¦   ¦   ¦1.¦Type of Securities Bought and Sold¦194  ¦
                +---+---+---+--+----------------------------------+-----¦
                ¦   ¦   ¦   ¦2.¦Willful Intent                    ¦194  ¦
                +-------------------------------------------------------+
                
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦   ¦    ¦B. ¦Sections 25504 and 25504.1                ¦195  ¦
                +---+----+---+------------------------------------------+-----¦
                ¦   ¦    ¦D. ¦Section 25504.2 Claims as to Ernst & Young¦197  ¦
                +-------------------------------------------------------------+
                
+----------------------------------+
                ¦                              ¦   ¦
                +------------------------------+---¦
                ¦Conclusion                    ¦197¦
                +----------------------------------+
                

The September 2008 collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (“Lehman”) spawned litigation across the country. The Lehman bankruptcy is pending in the bankruptcy court for this district. All of the securities and most of the other cases brought in or removed to federal courts have been consolidated before this Court for pretrial purposes. The cases that are the subject of this opinion are eight consolidated securities actions brought by seven California public entities and a California-based insurance company. They assert claims against Lehman's former officers, directors and auditors under the Securities Act of 1933 (the ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
28 cases
  • In re Barclays Liquidity Cross & High Frequency Trading Litig.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 26 Agosto 2015
    ...(9th Cir.1988) (discussing reasonable reliance as an element of a claim for fraudulent concealment); In re Lehman Bros. Sec. & ERISA Litig., 903 F.Supp.2d 152, 190 (S.D.N.Y.2012) ("[U]nder California law, a plaintiff must plead that he or she actually relied on the alleged misrepresentation......
  • In re Fairway Grp. Holdings Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 19 Agosto 2015
    ...142, 150 (2d Cir. 1993); Florio v. Canty, 954 F. Supp. 2d 227, 231-32 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) (Peck, M.J.); In re Lehman Bros. Sec. & ERISA Litig., 903 F. Supp. 2d 152, 168-69 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (quoting ATSI Commc'ns, Inc. v. Shaar Fund, Ltd., 493 F.3d at 98); Drum Major Music Entm't Inc. v. Young Mo......
  • Scerba v. Allied Pilots Ass'n
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 10 Diciembre 2013
    ...Civ. 8348, --- F. Supp. 2d ----, 2013 WL 3781549 at *3 (S.D.N.Y. July 22, 2013) (Peck, M.J.); In re Lehman Bros. Sec. & ERISA Litig., 903 F. Supp. 2d 152, 168-69 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (Kaplan, D.J.) (quoting ATSI Commc'ns, Inc. v. Shaar Fund, Ltd., 493 F.3d at 98); Drum Major Music Entm't Inc. v.......
  • Bryant v. Silverman, 15 Civ. 8427 (PAC)(HBP)
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 14 Febrero 2018
    ...Secs. (USA), LLC, 11 Civ. 2327 (GBD), 2013 WL 1342529 at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 29, 2013) (Daniels, D.J.); In re Lehman Bros. Secs. & ERISA Litig., 903 F.Supp.2d 152, 169–170 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (Kaplan, D.J.); Pa. Pub. Sch. Emps.' Ret. Sys. v. Bank of Am., Corp., 874 F.Supp.2d 341, 357 (S.D.N.Y. 20......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT