The U.S. District Court for the Second Circuit held that where a plaintiff and his counsel knowingly commenced a securities action in which the only purchase of an actual security occurred 18 years earlier, and failed to disclose that fact in the complaint, Rule 11 sanctions were warranted because the claim was clearly time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
Plaintiff John Libaire, Jr. and his attorney alleged in their complaint that, in addition to plaintiff’s purchase of a single share of common stock 18 years earlier, Mr. Libaire’s 2005 payment of annual dues to defendant North Fork Preserve, Inc. also constituted the purchase of a security. According to plaintiff, this later “purchase” established that his securities fraud claims were not time-barred.
Please see full article below for more information.
Firefox recommends the PDF Plugin for Mac OS X for viewing PDF documents in your browser.
We can also show you Legal Updates using the Google Viewer; however, you will need to be logged into Google Docs to view them.
Please choose one of the above to proceed!
LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.
Published In:
Administrative Law Updates, Civil Remedies Updates, Securities Law Updates
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.
© Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP | Attorney Advertising