Rule 10b-5 Fraud-on-the-Market

News & Analysis as of

Australia: An Increasingly Attractive Plaintiffs’ Forum for Securities Class Actions

The United States has long been the primary home for securities class actions around the world. This trend, however, was curtailed to some degree with the Supreme Court decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank, 130 S....more

Eighth Circuit Reverses District Court for Ignoring Price-Impact Evidence That Rebutted the Fraud-on-the-Market Presumption and...

In IBEW Local 98 Pension Fund v. Best Buy Co., Inc., No. 14-3178 (8th Cir. Apr. 12, 2016), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held, in a Rule 10b-5 securities fraud action, that the district court...more

Eighth Circuit Becomes First Appellate Court to Apply Halliburton II Price Impact Analysis

The Eighth Circuit has become the first federal circuit court to apply the Supreme Court’s Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2398 (2014) (Halliburton II) decision. Relying on Halliburton II, the Eighth...more

Inside the Courts: An Update From Skadden Securities Litigators - September 2015 / Volume 7 / Issue 3

This issue of Inside the Courts, Skadden’s securities litigation newsletter, includes summaries and associated court opinions of selected cases principally decided between May 2015 and August 2015. The cases address...more

A Quick Glance: The Two Central Holdings from the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Halliburton

In what amounted to a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court held in Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., 573 U.S. ___ (2014) that the presumption of reliance based on the fraud-on-the-market theory, first articulated in...more

Halliburton: Is the Fix as Basic as Alleging Omissions under Affiliated Ute? Or Is That Too Cute?

Even the most experienced securities defense attorneys regularly summarize Rule 10b-5(b) as creating a cause of action for “false or misleading statements and omissions of material fact.” Courts –including the Supreme Court...more

Supreme Court Decides AMGEN – Allows Plaintiff Class to be Certified Without Separate Materiality Inquiry

On February 27, 2013, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans & Trust Funds, No. 11-1085 (U.S. Feb. 27, 2013). In a six to three decision, the Court held that plaintiffs...more

"Supreme Court Holds Securities Fraud Plaintiffs Are Not Required to Prove Materiality of Allegedly False Statements to Certify a...

Today, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States held in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds that a securities fraud plaintiff alleging fraud on the market need not establish the...more

Supreme Court Hears Argument on Determining Materiality at the Class Certification Stage on 10b-5 Securities Fraud Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument on November 5, 2012, to determine the issue of whether a court should decide the issue of materiality in an SEC Rule 10b-5 misrepresentation case, before certifying a plaintiff class...more

9 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"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*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*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.
×