July 2014: Securities and Structured Finance Litigation Update

by Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
Contact

U.S. Supreme Court to Review Tolling of Securities Act Claims. In Police & Fire Retirement System of the City of Detroit v. IndyMac MBS, Inc. 721 F.3d 95 (2d Cir. 2013) (“IndyMac”), the Second Circuit addressed the reach of the Supreme Court’s decision in American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah (“American Pipe”), 414 U.S. 538 (1974). American Pipe held that “the commencement of a class action suspends the applicable statute of limitations as to all asserted members of the class who would have been parties had the suit been permitted to continue as a class action.” Id. at 554. The Second Circuit held in IndyMac that the tolling rule set forth in American Pipe does not apply to the three-year statute of repose in Section 13 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 77m. See IndyMac, 721 F.3d at 101. In March 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the Second Circuit’s IndyMac decision. How the Supreme Court resolves the applicability of so-called “American Pipe tolling” to Securities Act claims could have significant implications for investors, underwriters, and issuers of securities.

In IndyMac, the lead plaintiff and other potential class members alleged that the issuer and underwriters of certain residential mortgage-backed securities misrepresented the quality of the mortgages collateralizing the securities, in violation of Sections 11, 12, and 15 of the Securities Act. 721 F.3d at 101-03. Although the Securities Act generally provides that such claims are timely only if brought within three years of the issuance of the securities (with respect to Section 11 claims) or within three years of the sale of the securities (with respect to Section 12 claims), several potential plaintiffs sought to join the ongoing class action outside of the three-year statute of limitations set forth in Section 13, which is sometimes referred to as a “statute of repose.” Id. at 103. In support of the timeliness of their claims, the potential IndyMac class action plaintiffs argue that the tolling principle announced in American Pipe also applies to Section 13’s statute of repose. 721 F.3d at 103. The District Court (and, subsequently, the Second Circuit) ruled that it did not. Id. at 103, 109.

In American Pipe, the Supreme Court analyzed Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, which provides the procedures for class actions. The Supreme Court reasoned that a failure to permit a putative class action to toll the statute of limitations for all potential class members would encourage a multiplicity of suits (since each potential plaintiff might feel compelled to bring suit to ensure the timeliness of its claims), which is precisely what the class action mechanism was designed to avoid. The Supreme Court therefore held that filing a putative class action tolled the applicable statute of limitations for all potential class members until the court decided class certification or otherwise disposed of the case. American Pipe, 414 U.S. at 553-54.

In IndyMac, the Second Circuit initially considered whether American Pipe tolling was an “equitable,” judicially created doctrine (which could not toll Section 13’s statute of repose), or whether it was a form of “legal” tolling (and therefore could toll a statutory statute of repose). 721 F.3d at 107-08. The court did not answer this question, however, holding that even if the tolling principle in American Pipe were grounded in Rule 23 (and therefore constituted “legal,” rather than “equitable,” tolling), Rule 23 could not toll a statute of repose since the Rules Enabling Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2072(b), prohibits a federal rule from “abridge[ing], enlarge[ing] or modify[ing] any substantive right.” 721 F.3d at 109. Because the Second Circuit held that Section 13 created a substantive right to be free from liability after a legislatively determined period, the court reasoned that Rule 23 could not abridge a defendant’s right under a statute of repose to be free from liability from plaintiffs that had not brought suit within three years of the alleged violation. Id. Accordingly, the court dismissed the putative plaintiffs’ claims as untimely. Id. at 112-13.

In their petition for a writ of certiorari, the IndyMac plaintiffs argued that IndyMac conflicted with a decision from the Tenth Circuit, which had ruled that American Pipe tolling does apply to Section 13’s statute of repose. See Joseph v. Wiles, 223 F.3d 1155 (10th Cir. 2000). In Joseph, the Tenth Circuit held that “[i]f all class members were required to file claims in order to ensure the limitations period would be tolled, the point of Rule 23 would be defeated.” Id. at 1167. One point raised in Joseph, and cited by the petitioners in IndyMac, is whether “American Pipe tolling” even constitutes tolling. See Joseph, 223 F.3d at 1168 (“Indeed, in a sense, application of the American Pipe tolling doctrine to cases such as this one does not involve ‘tolling’ at all. Rather, Mr. Joseph has effectively been a party to an action against these defendants since a class action covering him was requested but never denied.”). Under this reading of American Pipe, that case did not actually turn on tolling, but instead relied on the representative nature of the class action vehicle, as the class members were effectively parties to the action once class action treatment was requested. Under this theory, the putative class action effectively asserted the IndyMac plaintiffs’ claims, and therefore no resort to “tolling” is required for their claims to be timely under Section 13’s statute of repose.

The petitioners in IndyMac, however, face a threshold obstacle that may prevent the Supreme Court from reaching the American Pipe tolling question at all. In their briefing to the Supreme Court opposing certiorari, the IndyMac respondents challenged the petitioners’ ability to benefit from American Pipe tolling because the putative class representative in the underlying class action lacked standing to assert the petitioners’ claims. See Brief in Opposition for Respondents, IndyMac, No. 13-640, at 9 (Jan. 24, 2014). The petitioners, in response, have pointed to their own standing to bring the class action claims as evidence that the Court should reach the question of whether American Pipe renders their claims timely. See Reply Brief for Petitioner, IndyMac, No. 13-640, at 10-11 (Feb. 12, 2014). To the extent the Supreme Court considers this standing issue dispositive, it may not reach the merits of the petitioners’ timeliness claim, thus leaving this important issue undecided.

Whether, and how, the Supreme Court addresses the reach of American Pipe tolling of Securities Act class actions may have a significant impact on the fortunes of securities issuers, underwriters, and investors. The Court’s decision is expected in late 2014 or the first half of 2015.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
Contact
more
less

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.