In an opinion explaining his refusal to dismiss a CalPERS case against the three big rating agencies, Judge Richard Kramer draws a line between the agencies and the financial press, suggesting vulnerability in the agencies' First Amendment defense.

Before Tuesday, the only credit ratings agency case to survive a motion to dismiss was a structured investment vehicle suit filed by Robbins Geller. Now there's another one, filed by the same firm before the same judge.

Last year, Manhattan federal judge Shira Scheindlin rejected the rating agencies' First Amendment defense and permitted the claims of three lead institutional investor plaintiffs to proceed. But now she's decided that they can't move forward as a class.

In another case involving their rosy evaluations of structured investment vehicles that went bust, Moody's, S&P, and Fitch raised the First Amendment defense that has gotten them out of so many prior suits. Not this time. If you're keeping score, that makes a total of three surviving securities cases against the credit rating agencies.

The firm has an innovative theory to hold the credit ratings agencies responsible for inflated evaluations of mortgage-backed securities. Too bad judges aren't yet buying it.

After a class action effort by ARS purchasers fails, the Anschutz Corporation stumbles in its attempt to bring an individual suit. Manhattan federal district court judge Loretta Preska once again rules that investors were given enough notice that Merrill Lynch was helping to prop up the ARS market.

A lot of plaintiffs lawyers in the burgeoning litigation over mortgage-backed bonds have eschewed fraud claims, opting instead for contract allegations that don't require a showing of scienter. Robins Kaplan went for fraud--and on Friday its strategy was vindicated.

Plaintiffs holding out hope that they could hold credit rating agencies liable for slapping AAA ratings on doomed mortgage-backed securities on the theory that the agencies acted as underwriters got some bad news on Wednesday.

True, Wednesday's rulings weren't all bad: Judge Jed Rakoff kept alive claims against banks involved in 19 mortgage-backed securities offerings. But plaintiffs continued their run of futility in ARS litigation and in claims against the ratings agencies.