State of NY v. JP Morgan Chase & Co.

Banks' Alleged Duty to Pay Interest Under the APL May Be an Actionable 'Obligation'

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 002) 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 30, 31, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 66 were read on this motion to/for DISMISSAL/SUMMARY JUDGEMENT. DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION Upon the foregoing documents, it is On February 19, 2015, Raw Data Analytics LLC (“relator”) commenced the instant qui tam action on behalf of the State of New York (the State) pursuant to the New York State False Claims Act¹ (FCA) (Fin L §§187-94) concerning defendants’ alleged failure to pay interest to the Office of the State Comptroller (OSC) under the New York Abandoned Property Law (APL) when there is a late escheatment of abandoned property to the OSC.² Defendants’ motion to dismiss, converted by the Court to a motion for summary judgment, is decided herein. In the amended complaint, relator alleges that defendants underpaid or failed to pay the State interest that they were required to pay on abandoned properties that they escheated late to the OSC. Relator alleges that since at least 2005, the defendants “have been late in escheating thousands of abandoned properties to the OSC” (amended complaint at 3). According to the allegations, defendants submitted reports, called “holder reports,” as required under the APL, to the OSC to report on abandoned properties that they had held. As for these reports, relator alleges that the report required defendants to state their obligation to pay interest on the late escheated abandoned properties, and each year defendants’ reports contained false statements that they owed less interest than was due, or no interest at all, and they nevertheless verified the statements as true and accurate (id. at

State of NY v. JP Morgan Chase & Co.

Banks' Alleged Duty to Pay Interest Under the APL May Be an Actionable 'Obligation'

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal