A New York district judge yesterday decided not to dismiss a class action suit involving the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) and BNY Mellon.
In a claim filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in June 2011, SEPTA, which administers the assets of transport workers in the region, alleged four causes of action based on the defendants provision of FX services: breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment and, in the alternative, breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan yesterday said questions remained about the contract between the parties. However, claims of unjust enrichment and breach of implied covenant by BNY Mellon were dismissed, while claims of breach of fiduciary duty were partially dismissed.
The authority contends that BNY Mellon was obligated contractually to provide currencies at best execution prices but failed to do so. The matter is now before the Court on defendants motion to dismiss the second amended complaint (SAC), principally on the ground that BNY Mellon had no such best execution obligation and that the pleading does not allege any legally sufficient claim.
Specifically, he said the contract claim would not be appropriate for such disposition even on assumptions resolving many of the uncertainties surrounding the contract in favor of the defendants. Nonetheless, it has proven appropriate, notwithstanding the uncertainties with respect to the contract, to dispose of some of SEPTAs other claims.
The case is one of a handful of federal court lawsuits against BNY Mellon regarding its pricing of standing instruction FX transactions that were moved from California and Pennsylvania to join three similar existing lawsuits in a consolidated case in the Southern District of New York in April last year. A district court judicial panel accepted BNY Mellons request to centralize the eight lawsuits in New York, saying that doing so will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
A statement from BNY Mellons New York press office said: We are pleased that the court’s procedural decision narrowed the case, dismissing two claims against BNY Mellon. As the litigation proceeds into the discovery phase, we are confident the facts will demonstrate the remaining claims also are without merit.
(JDC)