Supreme Court Rejects Statistical Significance as Bright-Line Rule for Materiality


The U.S. Supreme Court found that allegations of "statistical significance" were not a requirement for pleading materiality in a securities fraud action arising from a pharmaceutical company's alleged failure to disclose reports linking its cold remedy with loss of smell.

Plaintiff-shareholders alleged in the complaint that statements made by defendant Matrixx relating to revenues and product safety were misleading in light of reports that Matrixx had received, but did not disclose, concerning consumers who had lost their sense of smell after using Matrixx's Zicam cold remedy. Matrixx moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing, among other things, that plaintiff had failed to plead the elements of a material misstatement.

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Published In: Civil Procedure Updates, Products Liability Updates, Securities Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »