United States: Secondary Actors In Securities Transactions Beware: The Supreme Court May Have Aided And Abetted The Prospect Of Increased State Court Litigation

Last Updated: April 22 2014
Article by Peter J. Isajiw

Most Read Contributor in United States, July 2019

Secondary actors in securities transactions, such as lawyers, accountants, investment advisers and brokers, should be on alert in the wake of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Chadbourne & Parke v. Troice, 134 S. Ct. 1058 (2014), which limits the application of (and protections provided by) the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 ("SLUSA"), 15 U.S.C. § 78bb(f)(1). Historically, SLUSA precluded most state-law securities fraud class actions, reflecting the Congressional intention to centralize such litigation in federal court. In Chadbourne the U.S. Supreme Court narrowed SLUSA's scope, holding that it does not preempt certain state-law class action litigation against secondary actors. In so doing, the Court allowed the state-law claims to proceed against two insurance brokers and two law firms.

Following this precedent, there could now be an increase in state-law litigation against such secondary actors. For example, just this month, in light of the Chadbourne decision, a group of investors with claims related to the Madoff Ponzi scheme was given the opportunity to reassert state-law claims that were previously dismissed pursuant to SLUSA and the court raised the possibility that a major accounting firm could be reinstated as a defendant. See In re Tremont Securities Law, State Law and Insurance Litigation, No. 1:08-cv-11117 (S.D.N.Y. April 14, 2014) (TPG). Compounding the problem, under state law, defendants cannot take advantage of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 ("PSLRA"), including its heightened pleading standards and caps on damages and attorneys' fees. Nor can they rely on Supreme Court precedent eliminating aiding and abetting liability under the federal securities laws.

The Chadbourne Decision

Chadbourne arose from Allen Stanford's multibillion Ponzi scheme where investors purchased certificates of deposit ("CDs") in the Stanford Investment Bank ("SIB"), believing they would be used to purchase lucrative assets, such as "highly marketable securities issued by stable governments [and] strong multinational companies." Id. at 1065. In other words, although the CDs were not themselves "covered securities," plaintiffs expected that they were backed by or would be used to purchase SLUSA covered securities. Id. at 1073. Instead, the proceeds from the CDs were used in a Ponzi scheme to repay earlier investors, to finance speculative investments, and to fund the fraudsters' elaborate lifestyles. Id. at 1064. The victims brought state-law class action suits asserting aiding and abetting liability against secondary actors who allegedly assisted Stanford and SIB's scheme.

Defendants moved to dismiss plaintiffs' claims, arguing that they were barred by SLUSA, which precludes state-law securities class actions where plaintiffs allege "a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact in connection with the purchase or sale of a covered security." 15 U.S.C. § 78bb(f)(1). In the past, the Supreme Court has broadly interpreted the "in connection with" requirement, resulting in relatively widespread preclusion of state-law securities class action litigation and requiring such actions to proceed pursuant to federal securities laws, which do not allow for aiding and abetting liability. Citing this precedent, defendants argued that the state-law claims against them concerned alleged fraud "in connection with" the purchase or sale of a "covered security," and were barred by SLUSA. However, the term "covered security" under SLUSA only includes securities traded on a national exchange. Id. at 1062 (citing §§ 15 U.S.C. § 78bb(f)(5)(E); 77r(b)(1)-(2)). Here, although the CDs purchased by SIB's investors were not covered securities as defined by SLUSA (they did not trade on a national exchange), they were allegedly backed by covered securities that made their investments more secure. Id. at 1065.

Faced with this issue, the Fifth Circuit held that the alleged falsehoods concerning SIB's assets were not falsehoods made "in connection with" the purchase or sale of a covered security. Roland v. Green, 675 F.3d 503 (5th Cir. 2012). Instead, the covered securities were "too tangentially related" to the "crux of the fraud to trigger" SLUSA preemption. Id. at 520-22. Following the Fifth Circuit's decision, the Supreme Court was required to determine how broadly to interpret the "in connection with" requirement and whether SLUSA "extend[s] further than misrepresentations that are material to the purchase or sale of a covered security." Chadbourne, 134 at 1066. In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court held that it does not. Id.

Justice Breyer's majority opinion explained that "[a] fraudulent misrepresentation or omission is not made 'in connection with' such a 'purchase or sale of a covered security' unless it is material to a decision by one or more individuals (other than the fraudster) to buy or sell a 'covered security.'" Id. The Court concluded that a "natural reading" of SLUSA's language suggests there must be a "connection that matters" – meaning that "the misrepresentation makes a significant difference to someone's decision to purchase or to sell a covered security." Id. Additionally, the Court stated that the victims must have an "ownership interest" in the covered security for SLUSA to apply. Id. The fact that the plaintiffs purchased uncovered securities, and SIB was possibly going to purchase covered securities with plaintiffs' investments was not sufficient to bring their claims within the scope of SLUSA, and therefore the claims were not precluded.

In reaching this conclusion, the Court moved away from earlier precedent which explained that the phrase "in connection with" should be given "a broad interpretation" and would be satisfied by any deceptive practice that "touch[es] a securities transaction." Id. at 1069 (citations omitted). Notwithstanding its holding, the Court expressly stated that it was not departing from prior caselaw. It attempted to reconcile precedent by explaining that its prior cases would satisfy this new test because they all involved a false statement that was material to another individual's ownership interest in a covered security. Id. at 1066- 67, 1069.

Justice Kennedy, in a dissent joined by Justice Alito, wrote that the "key question" to determining whether SLUSA applies is whether the misrepresentation coincides with the purchase or sale of a covered security. Id. at 1078. The dissent concluded that Stanford's misrepresentation met this criteria (id.) and reiterated that precedent required the phrase "in connection with" to "be construed flexibly," and that this approach was increasingly important to encompass new and more ingenious fraudulent schemes. Id. at 1073. The dissent disagreed with the majority's holding that the purchase or sale of securities must be made by someone other than the fraudster, arguing that such a requirement does not appear in SLUSA's plain text. Id. at 1081. In light of these concerns, the dissent warned that the Court's ruling will "narrow and constrict essential protection for our national securities markets." Id. at 1073.

Implications Of The Decision

Chadbourne may result in more state-law class actions against secondary actors, including professional service providers such as law firms, accountants, investment advisers and brokers, where the alleged fraud is in connection with an uncovered security. In addition to CDs, unregistered securities acquired in private transactions, among others, also may not be considered SLUSA covered securities. For example, in Tremont, the court explained that plaintiffs had purchased limited partnership interests in various funds, and therefore they had not acquired an ownership interest in covered securities. Tremont, at *7. As a result, their claims were not precluded by SLUSA.

The ruling in Chadbourne may provide plaintiffs with a significant opportunity to circumvent not only the PSLRA's protections, but also the protections provided in Central Bank of Denver v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, 511 U.S. 164 (1994) and Stoneridge Investment Partners v. Scientific-Atlanta, 552 U.S. 148 (2008), where the Supreme Court barred investors from asserting aiding and abetting claims against secondary actors under federal law. Recognizing this possibility, the dissent cautioned that the decision "will subject many persons and entities whose profession it is to give advice, counsel and assistance in investing in the securities markets to complex and costly state law litigation based on allegations of aiding or participating in transactions that are in fact regulated by the federal securities laws." Chadbourne, 134 at 1074.

At this point, it is hard to predict to what extent this concern will materialize given that the decision only pertains to class actions involving securities not traded on U.S. national exchanges. Additionally, even without a SLUSA argument, defendants will be able to assert substantive defenses to the fraud claims brought under state law. Nevertheless, in the near term, litigation related to these types of matters is likely to rise.

The author would like to thank Gillian Groarke Burns, an associate in Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft's Commercial, Corporate & Securities Litigation group, for her contribution to this piece.

This article was first published on the Law.com Network on Apr. 18, 2014.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions