Credit Suisse Vows To Fight Bank of America Over $4 Billion Forex Lawsuit
According to the Credit Suisse lawsuit, over the past Class Period, defendants made numerous false and misleading statements to the Class Period concerning their business operations, their products and / or services and their compliance supervision functions and attempts to let high-risk customers take on too much leverage… Plaintiffs claim that this conduct by the defendants is both illegal and deceptive. They further claim that defendants’ violations have caused substantial harm to them and to their families and have also caused them to suffer economic hardships, which the court found was not properly mitigated.
Credit Suisse Lawsuit
The plaintiffs further claim that despite knowing of the illegal and harmful conduct and yet did nothing to stop it, the defendants failed to make any attempt to rectify this problem and instead continued to do business according to schedule, despite knowing that investors were pulling out their investments from Credit Suisse. The current lawsuit revolves around the fraudulent activities of Governor Henric Proval de Baerema.
De Baerema was appointed by the federal government to lead the takeover of Credit Suisse by the JP Morgan Chase Bank. The lawsuit claims that when he tried to pull out of the deal at a later date, he was informed that investors had already pulled out and so he proceeded with the transaction anyway, despite the fact that the investors had not paid their investments as required.
Henric Proval’s attorney defended his client, saying that the Bank of New York has full right to review the agreement between the bank and the shareholders of Credit Suisse.
He maintained that the shareholders were fully compensated when they decided to pull out of the deal. He also maintained that the shareholders were entitled to sue Credit Suisse for fraud, negligence and breach of fiduciary.
He claimed that the lawsuit is politically motivated and that plaintiffs actually tried to force the bank to drop the case. In a related matter, he maintained that the complaint filed by the attorney general of New York is inaccurate.
The shareholders of Credit Suisse have now asked the appeals court to put a stay on the lawsuit accusing the bank of fraud.
They argue that the lawsuit is based on information provided to them by their lawyers in an unofficial manner. They claimed that they only received this information after the lawsuit had been filed in federal court. They also said that they had offered all the information to the bank to be used in this context and had not received any return. They also claim that their representatives had met with senior management of the bank to discuss these matters.
The bank has rejected the accusations.
A three-judge panel of the Appeals Court of the District of Columbia declined to issue a stay order, pending the parties’ appeal. The panel did however, refer the case back to a lower court, which would mean another temporary injunction before the case goes to trial.
The court did however, agree to move the case to a more appropriate venue, to allow the plaintiffs and their lawyers to work out an out-of-court agreement that would avoid further embarrassment for the plaintiffs and their lawyers.
This would be a significant victory for Credit Suisse shareholders.
However, the Swiss bank could still pursue claims at the U.S. district court. The bank’s current motion says that the complaint should not be dismissed as being barred by the express terms of the bank’s foreign currency trading agreements. The bank contends that it is immune from federal and state lawsuits based on the mere threat of litigation. It is also arguing that the complaint does not apply because it can raise disputes at the state level.
According to the Credit Suisse lawsuit, over the past Class Period, defendants made numerous false and misleading statements to the Class Period concerning their business operations, their products and / or services and their compliance supervision functions and attempts to let high-risk customers take on too much leverage… Plaintiffs claim that this conduct by the…