News & Analysis as of

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

Implications for Future Securities Class Action Cases

What impact will the Court’s decision today have on the securities class actions going forward? DS: Today’s opinion provides defendants with an important tool to defeat a 10b-5 class action at a relatively early stage...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

6 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1