The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a summary order on February 3, 2026, in the case of *Stevenson v. Thornburgh*, a complex shareholder derivative lawsuit targeting Credit Suisse Group AG executives and auditors. The court emphasized that the ruling carries no precedential effect, as is standard for summary orders.
The case involves plaintiffs Gregory A. Stevenson and Nicole Lawtone-Bowles, who filed suit as shareholders of Credit Suisse Group AG on behalf of all shareholders. The lawsuit targets an extensive list of defendants, including former Credit Suisse CEO Richard E. Thornburgh and numerous other high-ranking executives and board members.
Among the named defendants are Bradley W. Dougan, John G. Popp, Brian Chin, Jay Kim, Mirko Bianchi, John Tiner, Severin Schwan, Iris Bohnet, Lydie Hudson, Kaikhushru S. Nargolwala, Seraina Macia, Joaquin J. Ribeiro, Michael Klein, and Noreen Doyle. The complaint also names several additional Credit Suisse executives including James L. Amine, Eric Varvel, David L. Miller, David R. Mathers, Lara J. Warner, Timothy P. O'Hara, Robert S. Shafir, Pamela A. Thomas-Graham, Sean T. Brady, Robert Jain, and Philip Vasan.
The lawsuit extends beyond individual executives to include multiple Credit Suisse corporate entities: Credit Suisse Holdings (USA) Inc., Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, Credit Suisse Capital LLC, and Credit Suisse Management LLC. The case also targets the accounting firm KPMG LLP and several of its partners and employees, including Paul Knopp, William Thomas, Larry Bradley, Laura M. Newinski, John B. Veihmeyer, Brian J. Sweet, David Britt, Scott Marcello, David Middendorf, Thomas Whittle, Cynthia Holder, and Jeffery Wada.
Additional defendants named in the case include Albert Sohn, Urs Rohner, Romeo Cerutti, KPMG LLC, and Regina H. Mayor, indicating the broad scope of the shareholders' allegations against Credit Suisse's corporate structure and external auditors.
The three-judge panel that heard the case consisted of Circuit Judges Guido Calabresi, Reena Raggi, and Eunice C. Lee. The proceedings took place at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse at 40 Foley Square in New York City.
The court's summary order specifically notes that such rulings do not establish precedential effect, meaning the decision cannot be cited as binding authority in future cases. However, Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 and the Second Circuit's Local Rule 32.1.1 permit citation to summary orders filed after January 1, 2007, provided they are cited to either the Federal Appendix or an electronic database with the notation "SUMMARY ORDER."
The court also established specific procedural requirements for parties citing summary orders, mandating that any party referencing such an order must serve a copy on any opposing party not represented by counsel.
Shareholder derivative lawsuits allow individual shareholders to sue on behalf of the corporation when they believe corporate leadership has failed to act in the company's best interests. These cases typically arise when shareholders allege that executives or board members have breached their fiduciary duties, engaged in self-dealing, or otherwise harmed the corporation through their actions or inactions.
The extensive list of defendants in this case suggests the shareholders' allegations may involve systemic issues within Credit Suisse's corporate governance, potentially including claims related to financial reporting, risk management, or regulatory compliance. The inclusion of KPMG and its personnel as defendants indicates the lawsuit may also challenge the adequacy of the bank's external auditing processes.
Credit Suisse, the Swiss multinational investment bank, has faced various legal and regulatory challenges in recent years. The bank's operations have been subject to scrutiny from regulators and investors alike, particularly regarding risk management practices and compliance with financial regulations.
The case numbers 24-1788 and 24-1794 suggest this matter involved consolidated appeals, indicating the complexity and scope of the underlying litigation. The fact that multiple case numbers were assigned reflects the court's handling of related claims or parties that were joined for appellate review.
While the specific details of the court's ruling are not disclosed in the available documentation, the issuance of a summary order typically indicates the court resolved the matter without requiring full briefing and oral argument. Such orders are often used when the legal issues are straightforward or when the court determines that a detailed written opinion would not significantly contribute to the development of legal precedent.
The resolution of this case at the appellate level represents a significant milestone in the ongoing litigation between Credit Suisse shareholders and the bank's leadership. The outcome may influence similar shareholder derivative actions and could affect how investors evaluate governance practices at major financial institutions.