United States: Second Circuit Vacates Securities Fraud Conviction For Excluding Expert Testimony

On December 8, 2015, the Second Circuit vacated the securities fraud conviction of former Jefferies & Co. trader Jesse Litvak.1 The Court also outright reversed the convictions on fraud against, and making false statements to, the government. In vacating the convictions on the securities counts, the Court held that the District Court abused its discretion in excluding two of Litvak's experts, both of whom would have testified that Litvak's misstatements were not material.

Litvak traded residential mortgage-backed securities ("RMBS") at Jefferies in the midst of the Great Recession. The indictment charged that Litvak made three types of fraudulent misstatements to counterparties: he misrepresented to purchasers Jefferies's cost to acquire the RMBS; he misrepresented to sellers the price at which Jefferies would re-sell the RMBS; and he misrepresented to purchasers that Jefferies was acting as a broker – as opposed to a principal – on the transaction.2

Some of the counterparties with which Litvak dealt were Public-Private Investment Funds, or PPIFs. PPIFs were created in the Great Recession in an effort to resuscitate the moribund RMBS market. PPIFs are capitalized, in part, by the U.S. Treasury. It was the Treasury's funding of the PPIFs that formed the basis for the charges of defrauding and making false statements to the government.

The Court reversed the convictions on these counts, finding that Litvak's misrepresentations were not material under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 and 1031. To be material under these statutes, a statement must be capable of influencing the decision of, in this case, the Treasury. Litvak's statements could not have influenced a decision of the Treasury, however, because the PPIFs made all of the trading decisions and the Treasury could not direct the trading.

The Court then turned to the securities fraud conviction, which is where things got interesting. Some background: Litvak's indictment caused more than a little agita among market professionals. Prior to the indictment, many assumed that, all of the players in this market being professionals rather than public customers, the back and forth that occurred over the phone was not much more than salesmen's posturing, i.e., nothing that a counterparty would or should rely on. Some believed the government had gone too far to criminalize the behavior and, after Litvak's conviction, expected the Second Circuit to hold that such statements were not material between market professionals. This view was buttressed a year ago when the Court granted Litvak's motion for release pending appeal, stating he "raised a substantial question of law or fact likely to result in . . . reversal."3

In fact, however, the Court, rather quickly, declined to hold the statements immaterial as a matter of law. The Court pointed out that the test for materiality under section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act is not the same as the test under the false statements laws addressed above. Under section 10(b), a statement is material where there is "'a substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would find the . . . misrepresentation important in making an investment decision.'"4 The Court disposed of the argument by noting that materiality is a mixed question of law and fact particularly well-suited to determination by a jury. And the jury found them material.

But the Court nonetheless vacated the securities fraud conviction because the District Court abused its discretion in excluding two of Litvak's experts. And the kicker, of course, is that the thrust of both experts' testimony was that the misstatements were not material. Specifically, one expert was prepared to testify that because RMBS rarely trade, the people who trade in them rarely rely on market information to price them. Rather, market professionals routinely rely on proprietary analytic tools to determine value. Thus what a counterparty may have paid, for example, is of little interest.

With such testimony before it, a jury could reasonably have found that misrepresentations by a dealer as to the price paid for certain RMBS would be immaterial to a counterparty that relies not on a "market" price or the price at which prior trades took place, but instead on its own sophisticated valuation methods and computer model. The full context and circumstances in which RMBS are traded were undoubtedly relevant to the jury's determination of materiality.5

Not to put too fine a point on it, the Court summed-up:

[W]e cannot conclude with fair assurance that the jury would not have found differently if it were presented with information about the functioning of the specialized RMBS market and the valuation process employed by those who participate therein.6

In essence, then, the Court vacated the conviction, not because the statements were immaterial as a matter of law, but as a matter of fact.

While this disposed of the appeal, the Court went on to discuss Litvak's arguments regarding other evidentiary rulings to guide the trial court on remand. One of the rulings related, again, to materiality.

As noted above, the test for materiality is whether a reasonable investor would find the information important. The use of the term "reasonable investor" makes the test objective. A debate exists at to whether the objective test is modulated by the circumstances of the case; specifically the sophistication of the parties. That is, is the "reasonable investor" different, for example, when a retail customer buys a stock from a brokerage as opposed to when market professionals trade complex financial instruments among themselves?

The Second Circuit touched upon this issue when it noted that "district courts in this Circuit have held repeatedly in the analogous civil context that 'the sophistication of the investor is relevant to both the adequacy of the defendant's disclosure and to the extent of the investor's reliance on any alleged misrepresentations.'"7 Among the authority for this proposition was the dissent in Republic of Iraq v. ABB AG,8 which the Court characterized as "noting that, in certain circumstances, 'sophisticated buyers' may 'not necessarily need the protection of the Securities Act.'"9 In any event, the Court held that the District Court erred when it excluded expert testimony to the effect that minor price variances would not have mattered to sophisticated investors.10

Finally, Litvak wanted to adduce testimony that his managers encouraged the types of statements at issue and that other traders at Jefferies made similar statements to customers. Litvak wanted the testimony to show that he believed these statements were permitted and thus to negative the necessary element of fraudulent intent. The District Court allowed testimony regarding Litvak in particular, but precluded evidence as to other traders as not relevant under Fed. R. Ev. 401, explaining it merely was "'suggest[ing] that everybody did it and therefore it isn't illegal.'"11

The Second Circuit held, however, that in excluding the testimony the District Court exceeded its allowable discretion "under the low threshold" of rule 402.12 In support, the opinion quoted a case [slightly] older than your author:

"[S]ince good faith may be only inferentially proven, no events or actions which bear even remotely on its probability should be withdrawn from the jury unless the tangential and confusing elements interjected by such evidence clearly outweigh" its relevance . . . .13

The obvious question is, will the government re-try Litvak? The question is even broader, however, because indicting RMBS traders is something of a cottage industry in the District of Connecticut. Three former RMBS traders at Nomura Securities were charged in an indictment unsealed in September.14 Before the Litvak decision, the prosecutor in Shapiro stated that if the Second Circuit reversed Litvak, it would "impair" the prosecution in Shapiro.15


1 United States v. Litvak, No. 14-2902-cr (2d Cir. Dec. 8, 2015) ("Litvak"), available on the Court's website, http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/.

2 Litvak got caught when his "misrepresentations were brought to light by his colleague's inadvertent email to a counterparty's representative . . . ." Id. at 41.

3 Order, United States v. Litvak, No. 14-2902-cr, at 1 (2d Cir. Oct. 3, 2014) (internal quotation marks omitted).

4 Litvak, slip op. at 36 (quoting United States v. Vilar, 729 F.3d 62, 89 (2d Cir. 2013), cert. denied, 134 S. Ct. 2684 (2014)).

5 Id. at 60.

6 Id. at 64.

7 Id. at 66-67 (quoting Quintel Corp. v. Citibank, N.A., 596 F. Supp. 797, 802 (S.D.N.Y. 1984).

8 768 F.3d 145, 182 (2d Cir. 2014) (Droney, J., concurring in part & dissenting in part).

9 Litvak at 66. The fact that the quote can be read to alter the meaning of the statement in the Republic of Iraq dissent, compare id. with 768 F.3d at 182, makes the Second Circuit's statement even more provocative.

10 See id. at 65-67.

11 Id. at 81 (quoting the trial transcript at 1472:18-19, reproduced in the Joint Appendix at 645).

12 Id. at 82.

13 Id. at 83 (quoting United States v. Brandt, 196 F.2d 653, 657 (2d Cir. 1952)).

14 Indictment, United States v. Shapiro, No. 3:15-cr-155 (RNC) (D. Conn. Sept. 3, 2015). See also Information, United States v. Katke, No. 3:15-cr-38 (RNC) (D. Conn. Mar. 11, 2015) (CLO trader).

15 Robert Gearty & Chris Dolmetsch, "Ex-Nomura Traders' Trial May Hinge on Outcome of Litvak's Appeal," at 1 (Oct. 7, 2015), http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-07/ex-nomura-traders-trial-may-hinge-on-outcome-of-litvak-s-appeal

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions