Second Circuit Blunts Impact Of American Pipe Tolling; Plaintiffs Must Bring ’33 Act Claims Before The Three Year Statute Of Repose Expires

The Second Circuit last week ruled on a key aspect of the timing of securities suits. Under the Supreme Court’s decision in American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538 (1974), plaintiffs are often able to revive claims by relying on earlier-filed class actions to toll the statute of limitations. RMBS plaintiffs have recently turned to American Pipe when their putative class actions are dismissed for lack of standing. 

In In re IndyMac Mortgage-Backed Securities Litigation, lead plaintiffs lacked standing to bring certain claims, which were dismissed by the district court. Other members of the asserted class—who had not been named as plaintiffs—sought to intervene in the action in order to bring those dismissed claims. Judge Lewis A. Kaplan of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York denied the investors’ motions to intervene.

On June 27, the Second Circuit affirmed. The court held that neither American Pipe tolling, nor the “relation back” provisions in Rule 15(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, revives claims that are untimely under the three year statute of repose in Section 13 of the ’33 Act. Unlike statutes of limitations, which govern the availability of remedies to plaintiffs, statutes of repose are understood to extinguish plaintiffs’ rights. Under this decision, Section 13’s plain language will govern and ’33 Act claims will be untimely if brought more than three years from the date the securities were offered.

 

Topics:  American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah, Class Action, Mortgage-Backed Securities, Motion To Intervene, Relation Back Doctrine, RMBS, Securities Fraud, Standing, Statute of Repose, Tolling

Published In: Business Torts Updates, Civil Procedure Updates, Constitutional Law Updates, Finance & Banking Updates, Securities 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.

© Orrick - Securities Litigation and Regulatory Enforcement Group | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »