Term: 2016
Docket: 16-373
Cal Public Employees' Retirement Sys. v. Anz Securities
- Pro
16-373 CA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT V. ANZ SECURITIES, INC. DECISION BELOW: 655 Fed.Appx. 13 LIMITED TO QUESTION 1 PRESENTED BY THE PETITION. CERT. GRANTED 1/13/2017 QUESTION PRESENTED: This case presents two questions about whether, under American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538, 554 (1974), a member of a putative damages class can opt out of the class action and pursue its individual claims if the class action was timely, but the individual class member's complaint was filed more than three years after the offending conduct such that it could arguably be barred by a three-year statute of repose. The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of petitioner's claims as untimely, applying circuit precedent from a case in which this Court granted certiorari but did not reach the merits because the case settled. See Police & Fire Ret. Sys. of Detroit v. IndyMac MBS, Inc., 721 F.3d 95 (2d Cir. 2013), cert. granted sub nom., Pub. Emps.' Ret. Sys. of Miss. v. IndyMac MBS, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 1515 (2014), cert. dismissed as improvidently granted , 135 S. Ct. 42 (2014). Here, the court of appeals acknowledged a circuit split, and stated that "the Supreme Court is in the best position to resolve" these questions, which "implicate[] the very nature of American Pipe tolling." The Questions Presented are: 1. Does the filing of a putative class action serve, under the American Pipe rule, to satisfy the three-year time limitation in Section 13 of the Securities Act with respect to the claims of putative class members? (Question granted in IndyMac ) 2. May a member of a timely filed putative class action file an individual suit on the same causes of action before class certification is decided, notwithstanding the expiration of the relevant time limitations? LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: 15-1879
In the case of Cal Public Employees' Retirement Sys. v. ANZ Securities, 2016, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of ANZ Securities and against California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS). The issue at hand was whether or not CalPERS had waited too long to file individual claims for alleged securities fraud related to the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008. According to federal law, there is a three-year time limit on such claims from when the security was offered or sold. While CalPERS argued that its filing deadline should have been extended because it initially joined a class-action lawsuit before opting out to sue individually, the court disagreed. It held that this statute is absolute and does not pause for any reason - including participation in a class action suit - thus barring their claim as untimely.
In the dissenting opinion for CAL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYS. v. ANZ SECURITIES, Justice Ginsburg argued that the majority's decision was inconsistent with the purpose of statutes of repose and unfairly penalized plaintiffs who had reasonably relied on existing class actions to protect their rights. She contended that tolling should apply to both statutes of limitations and statutes of repose because they serve similar purposes - preventing surprises through revival of claims that have been allowed to slumber until evidence has been lost or memories faded. Furthermore, she pointed out that there is no legislative history indicating Congress intended a different result when it enacted Section 13’s 3-year limit in Securities Act cases.
