S T A T E O F N E W Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________
1022
2019-2020 Regular Sessions
I N S E N A T E
January 10, 2019
___________
Introduced by Sen. RIVERA -- read twice and ordered printed, and when
printed to be committed to the Committee on Corporations, Authorities
and Commissions
AN ACT to amend the business corporation law and the retirement and
social security law, in relation to authorizing certain actions by
institutional investors
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The business corporation law is amended by adding a new
section 631 to read as follows:
§ 631. ACTION BY CERTAIN MUTUAL FUNDS AND OTHER INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS.
(A) ANY MUTUAL FUND OR OTHER INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR INCORPORATED UNDER
THE LAWS OF THIS STATE OR WHICH MAINTAINS ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSI-
NESS IN THIS STATE, THAT IS DAMAGED IN CONNECTION WITH THE PURCHASE OR
SALE OF A SECURITY AS A RESULT OF THE COMMISSION OF ANY ACT PROHIBITED
BY SECTION THREE HUNDRED FIFTY-TWO-C OF THE GENERAL BUSINESS LAW, MAY
BRING AN ACTION FOR DAMAGES AGAINST ANY PERSON, PARTNERSHIP, CORPO-
RATION, COMPANY, LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, TRUST, OR ASSOCIATION THAT
COMMITTED OR PARTICIPATED IN THE COMMISSION OF SUCH PROHIBITED ACT.
(B) NO MUTUAL FUND OR OTHER INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR THAT HAD FEWER THAN
FIVE HUNDRED BENEFICIARIES AT THE TIME OF THE PURCHASE OR SALE OF THE
SECURITY MAY BRING AN ACTION UNDER THIS SECTION.
(C) WITH RESPECT TO ALLEGATIONS THAT A REPRESENTATION OR STATEMENT WAS
FALSE, THE PLAINTIFF WITH RESPECT TO ALLEGATIONS REQUIRED TO PLEAD AND
PROVE THAT THE PERSON WHO MADE SUCH STATEMENT: (I) KNEW THE TRUTH; (II)
WITH REASONABLE EFFORT COULD HAVE KNOWN THE TRUTH; (III) MADE NO REASON-
ABLE EFFORT TO ASCERTAIN THE TRUTH; OR (IV) DID NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE
CONCERNING THE REPRESENTATION OR STATEMENT MADE. WITH RESPECT TO ALLEGA-
TIONS OF ANY OTHER NATURE, THE PLAINTIFF IS REQUIRED TO PLEAD AND PROVE
THAT THE PERSON ACTED WITH NEGLIGENCE.
EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[ ] is old law to be omitted.
LBD06775-01-9
S. 1022 2
(D) NO SUCH ACTION MAY BE BROUGHT MORE THAN SIX YEARS FROM THE TIME
THE PLAINTIFF DISCOVERED THE ALLEGEDLY PROHIBITED ACT OR COULD, WITH
REASONABLE DILIGENCE, HAVE DISCOVERED IT.
(E) AFTER SUCH ACTION HAS BEEN BROUGHT, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION
OF LAW TO THE CONTRARY, DISCLOSURE AND RELATED PROCEEDINGS SHALL NOT BE
STAYED DURING THE PENDENCY OF ANY MOTION TO DISMISS, UNLESS THE COURT SO
DIRECTS.
§ 2. Section 179-a of the retirement and social security law, as
renumbered by chapter 868 of the laws of 1975, is renumbered section
179-b and a new section 179-a is added to read as follows:
§ 179-A. ACTION BY CERTAIN PUBLIC PENSION PLAN OR FUND OR RETIREMENT
SYSTEM INVESTORS. 1. A PUBLIC RETIREMENT SYSTEM AS DEFINED IN SUBDIVI-
SION TWENTY-THREE OF SECTION FIVE HUNDRED ONE OF THIS CHAPTER, THAT IS
DAMAGED IN CONNECTION WITH THE PURCHASE OR SALE OF A SECURITY AS A
RESULT OF THE COMMISSION OF ANY ACT PROHIBITED BY SECTION THREE HUNDRED
FIFTY-TWO-C OF THE GENERAL BUSINESS LAW, MAY BRING AN ACTION FOR DAMAGES
AGAINST ANY PERSON, PARTNERSHIP, CORPORATION, COMPANY, LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY, TRUST, OR ASSOCIATION THAT COMMITTED OR PARTICIPATED IN THE
COMMISSION OF SUCH PROHIBITED ACT.
2. NO SUCH PUBLIC PENSION PLAN OR FUND OR RETIREMENT SYSTEM INVESTOR
THAT HAD FEWER THAN FIVE HUNDRED BENEFICIARIES AT THE TIME OF THE
PURCHASE OR SALE OF THE SECURITY MAY BRING AN ACTION UNDER THIS SECTION.
3. WITH RESPECT TO ALLEGATIONS THAT A REPRESENTATION OR STATEMENT WAS
FALSE, THE PLAINTIFF IS REQUIRED TO PLEAD AND PROVE THAT THE PERSON WHO
MADE SUCH STATEMENT: (A) KNEW THE TRUTH; (B) WITH REASONABLE EFFORT
COULD HAVE KNOWN THE TRUTH; (C) MADE NO REASONABLE EFFORT TO ASCERTAIN
THE TRUTH; OR (D) DID NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE CONCERNING THE REPRESENTATION
OR STATEMENT MADE. WITH RESPECT TO ALLEGATIONS OF ANY OTHER NATURE, THE
PLAINTIFF IS REQUIRED TO PLEAD AND PROVE THAT THE PERSON ACTED WITH
NEGLIGENCE.
4. NO SUCH ACTION MAY BE BROUGHT MORE THAN SIX YEARS FROM THE TIME THE
PLAINTIFF DISCOVERED THE ALLEGEDLY PROHIBITED ACT OR COULD, WITH REASON-
ABLE DILIGENCE, HAVE DISCOVERED IT.
5. AFTER SUCH ACTION HAS BEEN BROUGHT, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISION
OF LAW TO THE CONTRARY, DISCLOSURE AND RELATED PROCEEDINGS SHALL NOT BE
STAYED DURING THE PENDANCY OF ANY MOTION TO DISMISS, UNLESS THE COURT SO
DIRECTS.
§ 3. This act shall take effect immediately and shall apply to causes
of action accruing and actions pending before, on, or after its effec-
tive date.