In Latest Post-Crisis Lawsuit Ruling, Judge Upholds Suit Against Lehman

A judge in Manhattan District Court has rejected a bid by former Lehman Brothers executives and affiliates to dismiss a case alleging misleading practices, as the lawsuits that investors have filed against financial institutions continue to creep forward.

(July 28, 2011) – A federal judge in Manhattan District Court ruled yesterday that the most serious allegations in the lawsuit of investor losses brought against former Lehman Brothers Holdings (Lehman) executives will move forward, the New York Times has reported.

The suit, which was filed in 2008, is one of a number of suits filed by investors against financial institutions in the wake of the financial crisis. The five leading plaintiffs in this lawsuit are the Alameda County Employees’ Retirement Association, the Government of Guam Retirement Fund, the Northern Ireland Local Government Officers’ Superannuation Committee, the City of Edinburgh Council as Administering Authority of the Lothian Pension Fund, and the Operating Engineers Local 3 Trust Fund.

The defendants in the case include former Lehman CEO Richard Fuld Jr. and former CFO Erin Callan. The remaining defendants are other former Lehman executives, a number of Lehman underwriters (among them, UBS, BNY Mellon, and BNP Paribas), and Lehman auditor Ernst & Young.

The lawsuit alleges that the defendants misled investors about the firm’s accounting and risk management practices. More specifically, the suit alleges that Lehman’s use of Repo 105 transactions – repurchase agreements that allowed short-term loans to appear as sales – made it seem that the firm was less leveraged and in a better financial state than it truly was, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Want the latest institutional investment industry
news and insights? Sign up for CIO newsletters.

Judge Lewis Kaplan explained his decision to reject the bid filed by defendants to dismiss the case: “It is entirely plausible to conclude…that the misleading picture that Lehman portrayed played a material part in keeping its stock higher.” As a result, he ruled that the main accusations of the suit will stand because some of the investors’ losses may be “attributable to the alleged fraud.” The judge did throw out some minor allegations against the Lehman executives and underwriters as well as the majority of the allegations brought against Ernst & Young, the WSJ reported.

In February, aiCIO reported that the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) was suing former Lehman executives and underwriters, alleging the same infractions as the plaintiffs in the most recent ruling. According to the Los Angeles Times, CalPERS owned 3.9 million shares of Lehman common stock as well as around $700 million of the company’s bonds when the former financial giant filed for bankruptcy in September 2008. There has been no further ruling on the case.

The CalPERS suit, which was filed in US District Court in San Francisco on February 7, was later transferred to Manhattan District Court and assigned to Judge Kaplan. The cases, however, remain separate.



<p>To contact the <em>aiCIO</em> editor of this story: Justin Mundt at <a href='mailto:jmundt@assetinternational.com'>jmundt@assetinternational.com</a></p>

Whistleblower Sues California Public Pension After Alleged Threat of Dismissal

An investment analyst has sued the $5.5 billion Alameda County Employees’ Retirement Association for allegedly threatening to fire him after he accused the fund’s CIO of falsifying time slips.

(July 28, 2011)—An investment analyst for the Alameda County Employees’ Retirement Association (ACERA) has claimed in a lawsuit that the $5.5 billion public pension plan threatened to fire him after he accused the fund’s chief investment officer of falsifying time slips to receive full pay while actually taking a vacation.

In the lawsuit filed earlier this month in Alameda County Superior Court, Anthony Macaulay alleged that Chief Investment Officer Betty Tse received more than $14,000 for working when she was actually taking a vacation. When Macaulay raised alarms about the impropriety, the suit claimed, he was given a notice of dismissal, though after he filed an internal complaint he was placed on paid administrative leave two weeks later.

According to the lawsuit, Macaulay seeks job reinstatement and unspecified damages to be determined by a jury. Macaulay, who is black, also accused ACERA of racial discrimination.

“The facts alleged in the complaint set forth a clear case of retaliation by Mr. Macaulay’s supervisor, Betty Tse, almost immediately after Mr. Macaulay spoke up about what he saw as fraudulent activity at ACERA,” Macaulay’s attorney, Steven Tidrick said in a statement to Pensions & Investments.

Want the latest institutional investment industry
news and insights? Sign up for CIO newsletters.

ACERA is not the only California public pension fund to wrestle with issues of governance in recent months. In May, Jeffrey Baker, an investment officer at the $8 billion San Diego County Employees Retirement Association (SDCERA), claimed in a civil service complaint that his job was being eliminated because he raised concerns over outside consultant Lee Partridge’s risk limits. In the complaint, Baker alleged that Partridge breached the limits of its role, assuming excessive risk in its emerging markets and Treasury bond portfolios—risk limits that went beyond what the board of trustees allowed.



<p>To contact the <em>aiCIO</em> editor of this story: Benjamin Ruffel at <a href='mailto:bruffel@assetinternational.com'>bruffel@assetinternational.com</a></p>

«