Peter Saparoff

Peter Saparoff

Mintz Levin

Contact  |  View Bio  |  RSS

Latest Publications


Five Advantages to Section 18 – A New Weapon for Institutions

Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, while seldom used in the past, has been increasingly used by institutional investors in suits against banks and other entities. The advantages of Section 18 are as follows...more

9/30/2015 - Banking Sector Institutional Investors Material Misstatements Negligence Publicly-Traded Companies Reasonable Reliance Claims Right to a Jury Scienter SEC Securities Exchange Act

Australia – A New Frontier for Plaintiffs?

With the increasing barriers to successfully prosecuting a securities fraud case in the United States, including the jurisdictional limitations caused by the Morrison decision, institutional investors are sometimes now...more

7/23/2015 - Attorney's Fees Australia Australian Stock Exchange Class Action Discovery Indemnification Institutional Investors Jurisdiction Legal Costs Litigation Funding Morrison v National Australia Bank Securities Fraud Testimony

The Top 10 Obstacles to Litigating Securities Fraud Claims: Part I

Introduction: Congress passed the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. §§ 77a et seq. (Securities Act), and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. §§ 78a et seq. (Exchange Act, collectively, the Acts) following...more

12/10/2014 - Jurisdiction Litigation Strategies Material Misstatements Securities Act of 1933 Securities Exchange Act Securities Fraud Securities Litigation Statute of Limitations

Five Questions and Answers About the Second Circuit’s SEC v. Citigroup Decision

Last week we posted a summary of the Second Circuit’s decision in SEC v. Citigroup Global Markets, Inc. This week, as a follow-up, we pose the following five “yes or no” questions and provide responses as a way to further...more

6/11/2014 - Admissions of Liability Citigroup Judge Rakoff Neither Admit Nor Deny Settlements SEC SEC v Citigroup Settlement

Three Options for Institutional Investors Pursuing Claims Against Non-U.S. Issuers in the Wake of Morrison and City of Pontiac

In its 2010 Morrison decision, the Supreme Court decided that Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) (“Section 10(b)”),only reaches “transactions in securities listed on domestic exchanges”...more

5/22/2014 - City of Pontiac Fraud Morrison v National Australia Bank SCOTUS SEC Securities Exchange Act Securities Fraud

The Evisceration of the Federal Securities Law

I. Introduction - a. Legislative history of the Securities Act of 19331 (“Securities Act”) and the Securities Exchange Act of 19342 (“Exchange Act” and collectively, the “Acts”). ..i. Congress passed the Acts...more

2/13/2014 - Dodd-Frank Legal History PSLRA SEC Securities Act of 1933 Securities Exchange Act

6 Results
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.