NOMURA LOAN v. NOMURA CREDIT

No. 39.

30 N.Y.3d 572 (2017)

2017 NY Slip Op 08622

NOMURA HOME EQUITY LOAN, INC., SERIES 2006-FM2, by HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Solely in its Capacity as Trustee, Respondent, v. NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., Appellant. NOMURA HOME EQUITY LOAN, INC., SERIES 2007-3, by HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Solely in its Capacity as Trustee, Respondent, v. NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., Appellant. NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-AF2, by HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, Respondent, v. NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., Appellant. NOMURA HOME EQUITY LOAN, INC., HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST, SERIES 2007-2, by HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, Respondent, v. NOMURA CREDIT & CAPITAL, INC., Appellant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Reargued November 14, 2017.

Decided December 12, 2017.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Shearman & Sterling LLP, New York City ( Joseph J. Frank , Agnès Dunogué and Matthew L. Craner of counsel), for appellant.

Holwell Shuster & Goldberg LLP, New York City ( Michael S. Shuster , Daniel M. Sullivan and Adam T. Kirgis of counsel), and Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP, New York City ( Christopher P. Johnson , Zachary W. Mazin and Uri A. Itkin of counsel), for respondents.

Paul Hastings LLP, New York City ( Shahzeb Lari of counsel) and Los Angeles, California ( Timothy D. Reynolds , of the California bar, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), for Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, amicus curiae.

Murphy & McGonigle, P.C., New York City ( James K. Goldfarb of counsel) and Washington, D.C. ( Daniel T. Brown , of the District of Columbia bar, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), and Baker Botts L.L.P., Washington, D.C. ( Michael L. Calhoon , of the District of Columbia bar, admitted pro hac vice, and Vernon Cassin , of counsel), and New York City ( Douglas W. Henkin and John Perry of counsel), for Sand Canyon Corporation, amicus curiae.

Judges FAHEY, WILSON, CENTRA and BALKIN concur; Judge FEINMAN dissents in part in an opinion, in which Judge RIVERA concurs in part in a separate dissenting opinion; Chief Judge DIFIORE and Judge GARCIA taking no part.


OPINION OF THE COURT

In these appeals stemming from four residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) transactions, we are asked to decide whether claims for general contract damages based on alleged breaches of a "no untrue statement" provision can withstand a motion to dismiss...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases