21 total
Most secondary market misrepresentation claims statute-barred; multiple misrepresentations provision does not override limitation period.
The defendant brought a motion under Rule 21.01(1)(a) for a declaration that the plaintiff's proposed class action claims for secondary market misrepresentations under Part XXIII.1 of the Securities Act were statute-barred.
The court found that 11 of the 14 alleged misrepresentations occurred more than three years before the action was commenced and were therefore statute-barred under s. 138.14.
The court rejected the plaintiff's argument that s. 138.3(6) could save the claims by treating them as a single continuous misrepresentation.
However, the court found that the remaining three misrepresentation claims were not necessarily statute-barred, as the plaintiff had served a notice of motion for leave before the limitation period expired, allowing for potential reliance on the nunc pro tunc doctrine.