Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

In re Lehman Brothers Mortgage-Backed Securities Litigation

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
650 F.3d 167 (2011)


Facts

The plaintiffs purchased mortgage pass-through certificates sponsored by Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. and underwritten by Lehman Brothers, Inc. (collectively Lehman Brothers). Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., and Fitch, Inc. (collectively, rating agencies) (defendants), businesses that evaluated the credit risk of securities, gave many of the plaintiffs’ certificates a AAA rating. The plaintiffs brought a class action suit against the rating agencies under § 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, claiming that the rating agencies were underwriters of the certificate offerings and thus strictly liable for false statements and omissions in the registration statements Lehman Brothers filed for the offerings. The plaintiffs alleged that banks issuing the certificates shopped for the highest possible ratings by playing the rating agencies off one another, and that the rating agencies actively helped in the process. According to the plaintiffs, the issuing banks established the ratings they wanted and negotiated with the rating agencies to decide which mortgages would be in a given pool in order to create a loan pool that fit the desired rating. The plaintiffs also alleged that the rating agencies gave their rating models to issuing banks to help the banks structure their pool submissions, and that the rating agencies failed to update the models to reflect the increase in subprime mortgages and weakening loan-origination standards. The result was undeservedly high credit ratings for many of the plaintiffs’ certificates. The district court dismissed the complaint. The plaintiffs appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Raggi, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.