Securities Fraud Action Dismissal Affirmed
In In re: Interbank Funding Corp. Sec. Litig., No. 09-7167, an action by purchasers of securities of InterBank Funding Corporation, claiming that they relied on materially false misrepresentations and omissions by Interbank's auditor, the court affirmed the denial of plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend their complaint where, because, as plaintiffs conceded, the Affiliated Ute presumption of reliance did not apply to affirmative misrepresentations, plaintiffs' proposed amendment to their complaint would be futile.
As the court wrote: "In 2002, plaintiff-appellant Monica Belizan, on behalf of herself and a class of similarly situated persons, filed a complaint against, inter alia, defendant-appellee Radin Glass & Co., LLP ("Radin"). Belizan alleged that she purchased securities of InterBank Funding Corporation ("Interbank"), and, in doing so, relied on materially false misrepresentations and omissions by Radin, Interbank's auditor, made in violation of section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") Rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5."
- Read the DC Circuit's Decision in In re: Interbank Funding Corp. Sec. Litig., No. 09-7167