Sharan Nirmul

A Cash-Flow Case

In factoring, a company sells the right to collect a receivable and receives cash before the debt becomes due. General Electric used long-term factoring inside the company, with GE Capital buying receivables from GE Power. Investors alleged that the transactions supported reported industrial cash flow while the division’s underlying collections weakened.

Sweden’s Sjunde AP-Fonden, known as AP7, and the Cleveland Bakers and Teamsters Pension Fund represented purchasers of GE common stock. In May 2018, the court approved AP7’s selection of Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check as lead counsel. The court appointed the firm as class counsel and AP7 and the Cleveland fund as class representatives in April 2022.

The certified class included investors who acquired GE common stock from February 29, 2016 through January 23, 2018 and suffered damage. Notice was distributed by mail, The Wall Street Journal, and PR Newswire.

Discovery and the Surviving Trial Record

The investor claims survived substantial dismissal challenges. Plaintiffs interviewed more than one hundred witnesses and reviewed over 1.1 million pages produced by GE and third parties. Counsel took or defended fifteen fact-witness depositions, seven expert depositions, and the depositions of both class representatives.

In September 2023, the court denied GE’s summary-judgment motion on the central long-term-factoring and cash-flow theory, leaving that theory for a jury. Internal communications described cash as a central concern and showed management tracking the cost and future drag created by long-term factoring.

The court concluded that a reasonable jury could find that the practice concealed an expanding cash shortfall, materially altered the information available to investors, and was understood by management-level employees.

Plaintiffs’ expert connected price declines to partial disclosures in April, July, and October 2017. The court allowed the investor team to present its principal economic and industry evidence and struck a supplemental defense declaration.

Preparing the Case for Trial

The parties filed two joint pretrial orders containing witness and exhibit lists, deposition designations, proposed jury charges, verdict forms, statements of fact, voir dire questions, and disputed positions. They also briefed motions in limine, bifurcation, reconsideration, and expert admissibility.

Plaintiffs’ counsel conducted a two-day mock jury and focus group in February 2024, prepared examinations for more than fifteen potential live witnesses, developed demonstratives and video excerpts, and readied experts for direct and cross-examination.

The parties had mediated twice with former federal judge Layn Phillips and returned for a third formal session in August 2024 while trial preparation continued. The resulting settlement totaled $362.5 million shortly before trial.

The allocation plan uses purchase, acquisition, and sale dates to estimate artificial inflation and connect recognized losses to relevant disclosures. Eligible investors receive pro rata shares through the court-supervised claims process.

Bank of New York Mellon Foreign Exchange

Nirmul’s earlier case against Bank of New York Mellon concerned its standing-instruction foreign-exchange service. Complaints alleged that the bank promised best execution while pricing purchases near the day’s high and sales near the day’s low and retaining the spread between customer rates and the interbank market.

Nirmul served as lead counsel in the private customer multidistrict litigation, which ran for more than four years and encompassed 128 depositions and millions of pages of discovery. The United States, New York, the Department of Labor, and the Securities and Exchange Commission pursued separate claims or investigations.

The 2015 global resolution totaled $714 million: $335 million for the private class actions, $167.5 million to the United States, $167.5 million to New York, $14 million for Department of Labor claims, and $30 million for the SEC matter.

The bank admitted specified conduct in federal and state settlements. It also agreed to disclose how standing-instruction transactions were priced, provide pricing data, stop describing the service as free or as offering best execution on the former terms, end the employment of responsible executives, and provide information about replacement services.

Rivian Securities Litigation

Rivian investors challenged offering documents and later statements concerning the cost of building R1T and R1S electric vehicles, their sales prices, and the need for a price increase.

Nirmul’s team defeated motions to dismiss, secured class certification in July 2024, and carried the case through fact and expert discovery. The litigation analyzed more than 3.5 million pages, took or defended forty-eight fact and expert depositions, exchanged fifteen opening and rebuttal expert reports, fully briefed summary judgment, addressed seven expert-exclusion motions, and began trial preparation.

In a March 2026 declaration, Nirmul stated that he had actively supervised and participated in the prosecution and resolution of the action. The parties reached agreement after summary judgment was fully briefed and while expert-exclusion briefing continued.

The court approved a $250 million cash settlement and allocation plan on May 20, 2026 and entered judgment on May 29. Eligible class members must establish recognized losses through the claims process before receiving pro rata shares of the net fund.

Earlier Securities and Fiduciary Matters

Nirmul was part of the team in In re Bank of America Securities Litigation, which produced a $2.43 billion recovery for shareholders. He served as lead trial counsel in the Snap IPO litigation, which resolved for $187.5 million, and represented institutional investors in In re Global Crossing Securities Litigation, which returned more than $450 million. He also helped achieve class certification in the 1MDB-related securities action against Goldman Sachs on behalf of AP7.

Nirmul’s securities-lending work included the BNY Mellon case, in which Kessler Topaz served as co-lead counsel and the class obtained a $280 million settlement, and AFTRA v. JP Morgan, which returned $150 million to participants. He represented Transatlantic Re in a binding arbitration against American International Group that recovered $70 million for the reinsurer. He has also prosecuted Trust Indenture Act and contract claims involving Washington Mutual mortgage-backed-securities trustees for state public pension funds.

Investor-Side Practice

Nirmul is a partner at Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check. His practice includes securities, consumer, and fiduciary class actions for investors and other plaintiffs.

He speaks at Kessler Topaz’s Rights & Responsibilities of Institutional Investors conference in Amsterdam and Evolving Fiduciary Obligations of Pension Plans symposium in Washington, D.C.