Company and Case Information

Home

Index of Filings

News and Press Releases

Filings

Decisions

Settlements

Litigation Activity Indices

Top Ten List

Annual/Quarterly Updates

Clearinghouse Research

Articles & Papers

Search

Related Sites

About Us

Local Rules

Sponsors


Register


_______________
Copyright (c) 2001
Stanford Law School


Wachovia Corporation : Golden West Financial Corporation Acquisition
Summary: According to the notice of removal dated March 06, 2009, at all relevant times herein, Wachovia was one of the nation's largest financial service providers, servicing retail, brokerage and corporate customers. The Company portrayed itself as a conservative mortgage lender that did not participate in the high-risk lending activities engaged in by its competitors. At the height of the housing boom in 2006, Wachovia acquired mortgage lender Golden West in a move that the Company assured investors would solidify Wachovia's position as a leading mortgage lender without changing the Company's commitment to originating high-credit-quality mortgages.

In truth, Golden West was a high-risk subprime lender whose flagship pay option adjustable-rate mortgage loans (known as "Option ARMs" or "Pick-A-Pay" loans) were among the most toxic loans being peddled to borrowers, and through its acquisition of Golden West, Wachovia acquired a portfolio of more than $120 billion in Pick-A-Pay loans. Owing to the risky nature of the Pick-A-Pay loans, and the failure of Golden West and Wachovia to properly underwrite the loans, the loans were inadequately collateralized and became delinquent and defaulted at very high rates. As a result, the value of Wachovia's loan portfolio was materially overstated. In addition to its portfolio of Pick-A-Pay loans, Wachovia's balance sheet carried billions of dollars in other subprime assets, included mortgage-backed securities ("MBS"), residential mortgage-backed securities ("RMBS"), asset backed securities ("ABS") and collateralized debt obligations ("CDOs"), which were similarly overvalued.

On June 22, 2009, the Court issued two orders. The first was an order instructing that all future filings in any reassigned case were to be related to CASE to 09-CV-00998. The second order transferred the case pursuant To 28 U.S.C. §1404(a).

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code:
Sector: Financial
Industry: Regional Banks


COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: Wachovia Corporation
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:
COMPANY WEBSITE:

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE
Orange County Employees' Retirement System, et al. v. Carlson, et al.
 COURT: N.D. California  DOCKET NUMBER: 09-CV-00999
 JUDGE NAME: Hon. Ronald M. Whyte
 DATE FILED: 03/06/2009  SOURCE: 
 CLASS PERIOD START: 07/31/2006  CLASS PERIOD END: 04/25/2008
 TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
 PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  • Barroway Topaz Kessler Meltzer & Check, LLP (Walnut Creek)
      2125 Oak Grove Road, Suite 120, Walnut Creek, CA, 94598
       (voice) 925.945.0770, (fax) 925.945.0770, info@btkmc.com
  • Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (San Diego)
      12481 High Bluff Drive, Suite 300, San Diego, CA, 92130
       (voice) 858.793.0070, (fax) 858.793.0323, blbg@blbglaw.com
  • Klausner & Kaufmann, P.A.
      10059 N.W. 1st Court, Plantation, FL, 33324
       (voice) 954.916.1202, (fax) 954.916.1202,
    _____________________________________________
     TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS:  3

  •  DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
    Notice Of Removal
    Type: Complaint Date on the document: 03/06/2009
    Order To Transfer Three Related Actions Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)
    Type: Court Transfer Order Date on the document: 06/22/2009
    Related Case Order
    Type: Order Date on the document: 06/22/2009
    U.S. District Court Civil Docket
    Type: Docket Date on the document: 01/21/2010

     OTHER DOCUMENTS
    Case Name and/or Number: 
    Type:  Date on the document: 

    WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
    The information included on this Web site, whether provided by personnel employed by Stanford Law School or by third parties, is provided for research and teaching purposes only. Neither Stanford University, Stanford Law School, nor any of their employees, agents, contractors, or affiliates warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information or analyses displayed herein, and we caution all readers that inclusion of any information on this site does not constitute an endorsement of the truthfulness or accuracy of that information. In particular, this Web site contains complaints and other documents filed in federal and state courts, which make allegations that may or may not be accurate. No reader should, on the basis of information contained in or referenced by this Web site, assume that any of these allegations are truthful.
    Go to Search  page | Go to Case Index  page | Back to Top