Order Appointing Lead Plaintiff and Lead Counsel — Wax v. Cross River (D.N.J.)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey · No. 2:24-cv-09510-ES-JRA · Doc. 16 · 2025-01-08 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

1 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 
 
MITCHELL WAX, Individually and On Behalf 
of All Others Similarly Situated, 
Plaintiff, 
vs. 
CROSS RIVER BANK, 
Defendant. 
Civil Action No. 
2:24-cv-09510-BRM-JRA 
ORDER APPOINTING LEAD 
PLAINTIFF AND APPROVING 
LEAD PLAINTIFF’S SELECTION 
OF COUNSEL 
 
 
This matter having come before the Court by way of Plaintiff Mitchell 
Wax’s motion to be appointed lead plaintiff and to approve lead counsel (the 
“Motion”), pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the 
“PSLRA”), codified under 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4, ECF No. 9; 
and the above-captioned securities class action having been filed against 
Defendant Cross River Bank (“CRB”) alleging violations of the federal 
securities laws, ECF No. 1; 
and Plaintiff and Counsel from Berger Montague PC having issued a 
notice to potential class members of the action on October 2, 2024, pursuant to 
the PSLRA, 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(a)(3)(A)(i), informing them of their right to move 
to serve as lead plaintiff within 60 days of the date of the issuance of said notice, 
ECF Nos. 9-1 at 6, 9-4; 
and the PSLRA providing, inter alia, that the most-adequate plaintiff to 
Case 2:24-cv-09510-ES-JRA     Document 16     Filed 01/08/25     Page 1 of 5 PageID: 237

2 
 
serve as lead plaintiff is the person or group of persons that has either filed a 
complaint or has made a motion in response to a notice, has the largest financial 
interest in the relief sought by the class, and satisfies the pertinent 
requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 15 U.S.C. § 
78u-4(a)(3)(B)(iii); 
and Plaintiff Mitchell Wax having filed his Motion on December 2, 2024, 
for appointment as lead plaintiff and for approval of his selection of counsel 
stating that he suffered approximately $606,375.61 in financial losses on a 
“last-in-first-out basis” in connection with his purchase of Sunlight Financial 
Holdings, Inc. f/k/a Spartan Acquisition Corp. II (“Sunlight”) securities, ECF 
No. 9-1 at 2; 
and Sunlight allegedly being a “publicly traded technology-enabled 
point-of-sale financing platform that provided residential solar and home 
improvement contractors the ability to offer point-of-sale financing when 
customers purchased residential solar systems or certain other home 
improvements[,]” ECF No. 9-1 at 3; 
and such financing being allegedly “funded by Sunlight’s capital 
providers, including [CRB,]” id.;  
and “CRB [having allegedly] engaged in a plan or scheme that enabled 
Sunlight to originate loans to solar panel installers of dubious credit quality, 
and then, by warehousing those loans on CRB’s own balance sheet (as opposed 
to Sunlight’s), allow[ing] Sunlight to conceal its liabilities associated with those 
Case 2:24-cv-09510-ES-JRA     Document 16     Filed 01/08/25     Page 2 of 5 PageID: 238

3 
risky loans from its investors[,]” id.; 
and there being no other member of the class having filed a motion on or 
before December 2, 2024, for appointment as lead plaintiff and for approval of 
their selection of counsel; 
and CRB having filed a limited response to Plaintiff’s Motion on December 
23, 2024, noting that it takes “no position with respect to [P]laintiff’s [M]otion,” 
but “reserv[ing] all rights and defenses as to the underlying claims, including 
without limitation all defenses based on standing or the appropriateness as a 
class representative of any appointed lead plaintiff in addition to all other 
defenses to class certification[,]” ECF No. 15; 
and the Court finding that Mitchell Wax has the largest financial interest 
in this action; 
and the Court further finding, for the sole purpose of this Motion, that 
Mitchell Wax has made a preliminary showing that his claims satisfy the 
typicality requirement under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3) because he alleges, as all 
members of the class allege, that Defendant engaged in a fraudulent scheme in 
violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq. (the 
“Exchange Act”), by failing to disclose material facts about Sunlight’s 
business and financial condition, see ECF No. 9-1 at 8;  
and the Court further finding, for the sole purpose of this Motion, that 
Mitchell Wax has made a preliminary showing that his claims satisfy the 
adequacy requirement under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4) because he shares a close 
Case 2:24-cv-09510-ES-JRA     Document 16     Filed 01/08/25     Page 3 of 5 PageID: 239

4 
 
alignment of interests with other members of the class in prosecuting this 
action, ECF No. 9-1 at 9-10; 
and the Court further finding that Mitchell Wax is presumed to be the 
“most adequate plaintiff” because he: (1) filed the initiating Complaint (ECF 
No. 1); (2) has the largest financial interest as he suffered approximately 
$606,375.61 in financial losses (ECF No. 9-1 at 2); and (3) has made a prima 
facie showing of typicality and adequacy requirements pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. 
P. 23(a) and 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(a)(3)(B)(iii);  
and the Court further finding that other members of the class have failed 
to rebut the presumption that Mitchell Wax is the “most adequate plaintiff,” 15 
U.S.C. § 78u-4(a)(3)(B)(iii); 
IT IS, on this 8th day of January 2025, HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 
 
APPOINTMENT OF LEAD PLAINTIFF AND LEAD COUNSEL 
 
1. Pursuant to § 21D(a)(3)(B) of the PSLRA, 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(a)(3)(B), 
Mitchell Wax’s Motion (ECF No. 9) is GRANTED.   
2. Mitchell Wax is appointed as Lead Plaintiff of the class, as he filed the 
initial Complaint (ECF No. 1), has the largest financial interest in this 
litigation, and otherwise satisfies the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a). 
3. Pursuant to § 21D(a)(3)(B)(v) of the PSLRA, 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(a)(3)(B)(v), 
Mitchell Wax’s choice of counsel is approved, and accordingly, Rosca Scarlato 
LLC and Berger Montague PC are appointed as Lead Counsel. 
4. Lead Counsel, after being appointed by the Court, shall manage the 
Case 2:24-cv-09510-ES-JRA     Document 16     Filed 01/08/25     Page 4 of 5 PageID: 240

5 
 
prosecution of this litigation. Lead Counsel is to avoid duplicative or 
unproductive activities and is hereby vested by the Court with the 
responsibilities that include, without limitation, the following: (1) to prepare all 
pleadings; (2) to direct and coordinate the briefing and arguing of motions in 
accordance with the schedules set by the orders and rules of this Court; (3) to 
initiate and direct discovery; (4) to prepare the case for trial; and (5) to engage 
in settlement negotiations on behalf of Lead Plaintiff and the Class. 
 
SO ORDERED: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
HON. JOSÉ R. ALMONTE 
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 
 
Case 2:24-cv-09510-ES-JRA     Document 16     Filed 01/08/25     Page 5 of 5 PageID: 241

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.njd.555169.16.0.pdf

Size

225,285 bytes

SHA-256

f23c7d06ef79857adc43d77067319440d805d3c95e1e2a59aaeb91a77f85b5ea

Our copy

gov.uscourts.njd.555169.16.0.pdf

Original

No public link identified.