Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 09-15-2023

Case Style:

Joseph A. Kafka and Todd Kafka v. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC

Case Number: 22-CV-1034

Judge: Laura Taylor Swain

Court: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan County)

Plaintiff's Attorney:

Click Here For The Best New York Securities Fraud Lawyer Directory

Defendant's Attorney: Christopher James Houpt, Hans J. Germann, Lucia Nale, Matthew Fenn, and Michael Evan Rayfield, and Benjamin Bright

Description: New York City, New York commercial litigation lawyers represented the Plaintiffs who sued the Defendant on a securities fraud theory.

Plaintiffs Joseph A. Kafka and Todd Kafka (collectively, the “Kafkas” or “Plaintiffs”) bring this purported class action on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, against Wells Fargo Securities, LLC (“WFS” or “Defendant”), seeking to recover hundreds of millions of dollars in trading losses suffered by investors in certain investment funds and limited partnerships, to which WFS provided clearing and execution services as a futures commission merchant. (Docket entry no. 24 (“FAC”).) The Kafkas principally allege that WFS, in response to a temporary market volatility event on February 5, 2018, unlawfully forced the liquidation of an entire portfolio of investments, and plead seventeen causes of action including gross negligence, negligent supervision, tortious interference with contractual and business relations, breach of contract, and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty.

Before the Court are Defendant's motion to dismiss the FAC (docket entry no. 27) and an alternative motion to strike class claims (docket entry no. 30). WFS primarily argues that, because it had no customer, contractual, or other relationship with Plaintiffs, and dealt solely with the funds in which they held investments and/or partnership interests, Plaintiffs fail to state a claim for relief as to all counts. The Court has jurisdiction of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. sections 1332 and 1332(d).

Outcome: Dismissed.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:


Find a Lawyer


Find a Case