U.S. District Judge Paul Oetken in Manhattan certified a class
action as to JPMorgan's liability but not as to damages, saying it
was unclear how investors could value the certificates they bought,
given how the market was "not particularly liquid." He said the
plaintiffs could try again to certify a class on damages.
Oetken ruled 10 months after JPMorgan reached a $13 billion
settlement to resolve U.S. and state probes into the New York-based
bank's sale of mortgage securities.
The class consists of investors before March 23, 2009 in
certificates issued from nine of 11 trusts created by JPMorgan for
the April 2007 offering. The other two trusts attracted only a
handful of investors, and are the subject of other lawsuits.
Oetken named the Laborers Pension Trust Fund for Northern California
and Construction Laborers Pension Trust for Southern California as
lead plaintiffs, and their law firm Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd as
lead counsel.
A JPMorgan spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for
comment. The plaintiffs' lawyer did not immediately respond to a
similar request.
The lawsuit said that JPMorgan misled prospective investors about
the underwriting, appraisals and credit quality of the home loans
underlying the certificates.
It said that by the time the litigation began in March 2009, six
months after Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc failed, the certificates
were worth at most 62 cents on the dollar.
[to top of second column]
|
Oetken rejected JPMorgan's arguments that the case could not be a
class action because it was based on the practices of many
originators and more than 8,000 underwriting guidelines, some
investors were more sophisticated than others, and the MBS had
evolved too rapidly during the two-year class period.
He also said he had no basis to accept JPMorgan's request that he
disqualify Robbins Geller because one of what the judge called the
firm's "confidential sources" for the lawsuit, a former employee at
a loan originator, later withdrew his testimony - something the bank
said had occurred in other cases handled by the firm.
The case, whose caption names a different plaintiff, is Fort Worth
Employees' Retirement Fund v. JPMorgan Chase & Co, U.S. District
Court, Southern District of New York, No. 09-03701.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Grant McCool)
[© 2014 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2014 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
|