Luther

Luther v. Countrywide Financial Corp.

Good Law
125 Cal. Rptr. 3d 716·195 Cal. App. 4th 789·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 596
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 18, 2011No. B222889California3,264 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Armstrong, J.

This case presents a single issue of statutory interpretation. The federal Securities Act of 1933 (the 1933 Act; 15 U.S.C. § 77a et seq.), as amended by the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (SLUSA; Pub.L. No. 105-353 (Nov. 3, 1998) 112 Stat. 3227 ), provides for concurrent jurisdiction for cases asserting claims under the 1933 Act, except as specifically provided with regard to certain class actions.

Defendants contend, and the trial court found, that the exception includes this case, which is, in the parlance of the statute, a “covered class action” *793 bringing causes of action under federal law in connection with “noncovered” securities. Plaintiffs argue to the contrary. We agree with plaintiffs, and thus reverse the judgment.

Factual and Procedural Summary

The case, and its procedural history, can be briefly described. Plaintiffs and appellants are David H. Luther and a number of pension funds and other institutional investors. Defendants are Countrywide Financial Corporation and several of its subsidiaries, several individuals, and several financial institutions. 1 The complaint alleged that defendants issued, and plaintiffs bought,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.