Recent Blog Posts
-
When Call-Center Scripts Go Bad
May 25 20128:38 am EDT -
Zynga on the Defense
May 24 20123:02 pm EDT -
Facebook Fallout Includes PR Fail
May 24 20129:25 am EDT -
Space Drama to Be Continued
May 21 20129:42 am EDT -
What Made Groupon Go Pop?
May 18 20129:34 am EDT -
Study Finds Millennials are Underbanked
May 17 201212:35 pm EDT -
Mad Men Not Impressed With Facebook IPO
May 17 201210:13 am EDT -
Pricing Experiment in Progress
May 16 201211:02 am EDT -
Did I Tweet That Out Loud?
May 15 20129:44 am EDT -
Revenge of the Liberal Arts Major
May 14 20122:58 pm EDT
Court to Lawyers: Stop Beating a Dead Decision
Definitely dead.
"Scheme liability," that is, for third parties such as lawyers, accountants and investments banks in cases alleging corporate fraud on investors.
Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins, William S. Lerach's former law firm, tried a Hail Mary pass of sorts last Thursday, filing a brief at the Supreme Court arguing that their $40 billion in claims against Enron's investment banks could somehow survive the court's 5-3 ruling in Stoneridge Investment Partners v. Scientific-Atlanta.
Well, let's just say Lerach's former partners did not have a Tom Brady moment.
When the justices sat down for their Friday conference, a regular event to dispose of petitions with issues that track decisions rendered earlier in the week, they put the nails on the coffin of scheme liability.
"The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied," the justices ordered in the Enron case, called Regents of the University of California v. Merrill Lynch et al. The order notes that Justice Anthony M. Kennedy "took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition." Kennedy penned the majority opinion Stoneridge.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court ordered the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider a ruling that allowed "scheme liability" claim in Avis Budget Group v. California State Teachers' Retirement. That case alleges that business partners of Homestores.com, among them Time Warner, participated in an effort to pump up its financials.
The Supreme Court explicitly ordered the 9th Circuit to reconsider the case "in light of" the justice's ruling in Stoneridge.
Update: Dan Newman, spokesman for Coughlin Stoia, says the Enron plaintiffs are still not giving up:
"The fight continues to hold the banks accountable for orchestrating the fraud as Enron shareholders have viable options in District Court because of misleading information provided by the banks in analyst statements and offering documents," he said in an email message.
He added that the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals sent the case back to district court in Houston for further proceedings when it rejected claims against the banks based on "scheme liability."
Newman must be a fan of Mark Twain.
by Karen Donovan
Comments
If you are commenting using a Facebook account, your profile information may be displayed with your comment depending on your privacy settings. By leaving the 'Post to Facebook' box selected, your comment will be published to your Facebook profile in addition to the space below.





