Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Should Section 5 of the FTC Act be Amended to Add a Private Right of Action?
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Challenges of Using the Current Law to Address Dark Patterns, with Guest Gregory Dickinson, Assistant Professor, St. Thomas University
Webinar Recording: An Overview of the American Data Privacy and Protection Act
CF on Cyber: An Update on the Changes to the Florida Telemarketing Act
The en banc Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a shareholder derivative action in light of an exclusive-forum bylaw requiring assertion of derivative claims in the Delaware Court of Chancery,...more
On July 1, 2019, Judge Michael A. Shipp of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey denied a motion to dismiss a complaint alleging insider trading in violation of Section 20A of the Securities Exchange...more
On April 23, 2019, the Supreme Court dismissed the writ of certiorari as “improvidently granted” in a closely-watched appeal raising the question whether an assertion of mere negligence is sufficient to plead and prove a...more
One of the more intriguing rulings of this Supreme Court Term is the Court’s one-sentence order yesterday dismissing as improvidently granted the writ of certiorari issued in Emulex Corp. v. Varjabedian (No. 18-459). The...more
Emulex Corp. v. Varjabedian, No. 18-459 (U.S. Apr. 23, 2019) - On April 23, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a writ of certiorari that could have decided whether investors may sue public companies alleged to have...more
Emulex Corp. v. Varjabedian, No. 18-459 - In a one-line per curiam order issued this morning, a unanimous Supreme Court declined to resolve a dispute, argued before the Court last Monday, over whether Section 14(e) of the...more
On April 15, 2019, the Supreme Court heard argument in a closely-watched case asking whether mere negligence is sufficient to plead and prove a claim under Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange...more
On January 4, 2019, the United States Supreme Court granted a petition for writ of certiorari concerning whether Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 includes an implied private right of action for negligent...more
On Friday afternoon, January 4, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear the following six cases: Emulex Corp. v. Varjabedian, No. 18-459: Whether the Ninth Circuit correctly held, in express...more
Although the United States Supreme Court has never directly addressed the issue, many lower courts have inferred that a private right action exists under Section 14(e) of the Exchange Act. That may not come of much a...more
Twenty-five years ago, in Ceres Partners, the Second Circuit held that the implied private right of action under Section 14 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) was subject to a three-year repose...more
The Supreme Court has a long history of rejecting expansive interpretations of implied private rights of action under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act. Most notably, since 1975, it rejected the argument that mere...more