Federal Housing Finance Agency v. Nomura Holding America, Inc. et al
| Federal Housing Finance Agency |
| Nomura Holding America, Inc., Nomura Asset Acceptance Corporation, Nomura Home Equity Loan, Inc., Nomura Credit & Capital, Inc., Nomura Securities International, Inc., RBS Securities, Inc., David Findlay, John McCarthy, John P. Graham, Nathan Gorin and Dante Larocca |
| 1:2011cv06201 |
| September 2, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| John F. Keenan |
| Securities/Commodities/Exchanges |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 77 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
1686
OPINION & ORDER #105495: This case is complex from almost any angle, but at its core there is a single, simple question. Did defendants accurately describe the home mortgages in the Offering Documents for the securities they sold that were backed by those mortgages? Following trial, the answer to that question is clear. The Offering Documents did not correctly describe the mortgage loans. The magnitude of falsity, conservatively measured, is enormous. Given the magnitude of the falsity, it i s perhaps not surprising that in defending this lawsuit defendants did not opt to prove that the statements in the Offering Documents were truthful. Instead, defendants relied, as they are entitled to do, on a multifaceted attack on plaintiffs evide nce. That attack failed, as did defendants sole surviving affirmative defense of loss causation. Accordingly, judgment will be entered in favor of plaintiff....An order will issue for FHFA to submit a proposed judgment with updated damages figures calculated under the formulae applied in this Opinion. A schedule will also be set for submissions concerning attorneys fees. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 5/11/2015) (gr) Modified on 5/11/2015 (soh).
|
|
Filing
1436
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants' hearsay objection to the documents appearing on the "Sample Loan Files" tab of FHFA's exhibit list is overruled. (Signed by Judge Denise Cote on 3/13/15) (sr)
|
|
Filing
1362
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the practices the parties followed in connection with third-party discovery during the period of fact discovery in this action will govern the discoverability of communications that took place p rior to March 2, 2015 between the appraisers and either defendants or defense counsel, including the discoverability of any drafts of the appraisers' affidavit testimony. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, to the extent that the material sought by FHFA is discoverable, it shall be produced to FHFA at least twenty-four hours in advance of the appraiser's deposition. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall promptly confer in an attempt to reach agreement about the production of documents by the appraisers or by defendants and defense counsel and bring any remaining disputes to the Courts attention. (Signed by Judge Denise Cote on 3/4/15) (sr)
|
|
Filing
1310
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER.....Defendants' January 30 motion in limine is governed by the standards articulated herein. Where this general guidance is insufficient, the parties will have an opportunity to obtain rulings on particular items of evidence. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 2/20/2015) (gr)
|
|
Filing
1295
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER....FHFA's January 30 motion in limine is governed by the standards articulated here. Decision on identified issues is reserved until oral argument. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 2/19/2015) (gr)
|
|
Filing
1289
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: FHFAs January 8 motion to exclude evidence regarding Fannie Mae that postdates November 30, 2005 and regarding Freddie Mac that postdates April 30, 2007 is denied. Similarly, FHFAs motion to exclude all lay opinion evidence on the issue of loss causation is denied. (Signed by Judge Denise Cote on 2/18/15) (tg)
|
|
Filing
1272
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: FHFAs December 19 motion to exclude in part the expert testimony of Timothy J. Riddiough is granted. (Signed by Judge Denise Cote on 2-16-15) (tg)
|
|
Filing
1270
OPINION AND ORDER: FHFA's December 19, 2014 motion to exclude the expert testimony of Stephen Ryan is granted. (Signed by Judge Denise Cote on 2/13/15) (sr)
|
|
Filing
1263
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Defendants January 8 motion to exclude Hunters testimony about pre-closing loan tape discrepancies is denied. (Signed by Judge Denise Cote on 2-12-2015) (tg)
|
|
Filing
1255
OPINION & ORDER #105225 denying 977 Defendants' November 25, 2014 motion in limine addressed to the choice of relevant underwriting guidelines; denying 1008 FHFAs December 22, 2014 motion to exclude the expert testimony of Michael Forester; and denying 1170 defendants' January 5 motion to exclude the testimony of Robert Hunter based on information not available at origination. (Signed by Judge Denise Cote on 2-11-2015) (tg) Modified on 2/11/2015 (gr). Modified on 2/11/2015 (soh).
|
|
Filing
1248
OPINION & ORDER...FHFA's January 8 motion to exclude the expert testimony of Vandell and those aspects of Riddiough's calculation that rely on Vandell's analysis is granted. Defendants' January 8 motion to exclude the expert testimony of Saunders is denied as moot. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 2/10/2015) (gr)
|
|
Filing
1195
OPINION & ORDER...Defendants' motion to exclude Hunter's testimony on owner occupancy is denied. The Prospectus Supplements' statistics on owner occupancy refer to occupancy status as of the Cut-Off Date, not simply to borrowers' intentions at origination. Hunter's opinion regarding owner occupancy are admissible, but only to the extend he opines on falsity or misrepresentation as of the Cut-Off Date. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 1/29/2015) (gr)
|
|
Filing
1182
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 1150 Motion in Limine to strike John A. Kilpatrick's expert testimony on LTV ratios. (Signed by Judge Denise Cote on 1/28/15) (tg)
|
|
Filing
997
OPINION & ORDER....FHFA's motion in limine of October 14, 2014 to prohibit defendants from introducing documents or testimony related to the GSEs AUS is granted in connection with any evidence concerning minimum industry standards or the other issues identified in FHFA's motion. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 12/18/2014) (gr)
|
|
Filing
931
OPINION & ORDER...FHFA's August 25, 2014 motion for summary judgment on Defendants' statute of limitations defense is granted. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 11/18/2014) (gr)
|
|
Filing
807
OPINION & ORDER...FHFA's letter-motion of August 22, 2014 is granted. FHFA is permitted to file summary judgment motions as to Nomura's and RBS's Due Diligence defenses, and the Nomura trial is adjourned. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 9/8/2014) (gr) Modified on 9/8/2014 (gr). Modified on 9/8/2014 (gr).
|
|
Filing
513
OPINION & ORDER re: 469 MOTION to Compel Federal Housing Finance Agency to produce documents withheld on the basis of the bank examination and deliberative process privileges. filed by John P. Graham, Nomura Securities International, Inc., John McC arthy, Nathan Gorin, Nomura Credit & Capital, Inc., N. Dante Larocca, David Findlay, Nomura Holding America, Inc., Nomura Asset Acceptance Corporation, Nomura Home Equity Loan, Inc. The defendants August 30, 2013 motion to compel production of documents withheld by FHFA on the basis of the bank examination and deliberative process privileges is denied. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 10/16/2013) (djc)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
