image description

Cases & Experience

Goldman, Sachs & Co. v. NECA-IBEW Health & Welfare Fund (U.S. Supreme Court)

NECA-IBEW Health & Welfare Fund brought a putative class action under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act, alleging supposedly common misstatements relating to 17 different mortgage-backed securities underwritten and issued by Goldman Sachs and its affiliates. But NECA purchased only two of the 17 securities in question. The Second Circuit held that a named plaintiff has “class standing” to bring claims with respect to securities that it did not purchase, so long as those claims raise the “same set of concerns” as the claims with respect to the securities actually purchased by the plaintiff. The court therefore revived NECA’s claims as to the 15 unpurchased securities. Goldman Sachs has petitioned for certiorari. We filed an amicus brief in support of the petition on behalf of DRI, arguing that constitutional, prudential, and statutory standing principles should limit a plaintiff to suing over only those securities it actually traded.  The Supreme Court denied certiorari.


Amicus Brief