Securities Act of 1933

The Securities Act of 1933 is a United States federal statute enacted in response to the stock market crash of 1929 and the ensuing Great Depression. The Act has two primary purposes: 1) to give investors better... more +
The Securities Act of 1933 is a United States federal statute enacted in response to the stock market crash of 1929 and the ensuing Great Depression. The Act has two primary purposes: 1) to give investors better access to material information prior to investing 2) ensure that transactions are not based on fraud. In order to effectuate its dual goals, the Act requires that any offer or sale of securities is registered with the SEC. less -
News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court limits liability for statements of opinion contained in securities offerings

In a highly anticipated decision issued Tuesday, the United States Supreme Court confirmed that an issuer’s statements of honestly held opinion or belief cannot give rise to liability under section 11 of the Securities Act of...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Liability Standard for Statements of Opinion in Securities Offering Registration Statements

A common question under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 is whether and under what circumstances an issuer’s statement of opinion or belief may give rise to liability. The Supreme Court recently held in Omnicare, Inc....more

Supreme Court’s Omnicare Decision Follows Middle Path Advocated by Lane Powell and Washington Legal Foundation

In the March 24 opinion issued in Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund (Omnicare), the Supreme Court rejected the two extremes advocated by the parties regarding how the truth or...more

George Costanza and the Supreme Court Align in Ruling This Week on Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933

In a classic Seinfeld episode, George Costanza opined: "it's not a lie, if you believe it". In a ruling handed down on March 24th, the Supreme Court agreed with this sentiment as it concerned claims brought under Section 11...more

The Supreme Court's Omnicare Decision: Implications And Remaining Questions Regarding When Opinions Are Actionable Under The...

On March 24, 2015, the Supreme Court issued its much anticipated decision in Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund, No. 13-435, 2015 WL 1291916 (Mar. 24, 2015). With some significant...more

Omnicare Decision Clarifies Grounds for Section 11 Liability

The Supreme Court holds that section 11 liability does not attach to a statement of opinion merely because the opinion is objectively false. On March 24, the US Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated decision in...more

Supreme Court’s Omnicare Decision Follows Middle Path Advocated by Lane Powell and WLF

In the opinion issued yesterday in Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund (“Omnicare”), the Supreme Court rejected the two extremes advocated by the parties regarding how the truth or...more

Supreme Court Holds That Issuers Can Be Liable for Omitting Material Facts From Statements of Opinion in Omnicare Case

In its opinion in Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund, released yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a securities issuer’s statement of opinion in a registration statement,...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Standard For Holding Issuers Liable Under The Securities Act Of 1933

In a highly-watched securities law decision, the United States Supreme Court yesterday ruled unanimously that opinion statements in public securities registration statements are not actionable under § 11 of the Securities...more

Blog: SEC Adopts Reg A+

At an open meeting this morning, the SEC adopted rules and forms related to the offer and sale of securities under Section 3(b) of the Securities Act, so-called Reg A+, as mandated by Section 401 of the JOBS Act. ...more

Omnicare Opinion Expands Liability for Expressions of Opinion Under Section 11

The Supreme Court, in Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund, 575 U.S. ___ (March 24, 2015), expanded the scope of liability for expressions of opinions under Section 11 of the...more

IMHO, Omnicare Doesn’t Materially Change Opinion Disclosure

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its anticipated Omnicare decision, which addresses the standard of liability applied to expressions of opinion in a registration statement for a public offering. While there will be...more

Supreme Court Decides Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund

On March 24, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a pure statement of opinion in a securities registration statement is not an “untrue statement of a material fact” under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 just...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Liability for Statements of Opinion in Registration Statements

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that a statement of opinion in a registration statement cannot be actionable as a misstatement of fact under § 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 if the issuer actually believed the opinion...more

Blog: SCOTUS Decides Omnicare: 6th Circuit Applied Incorrect Standards In The Context Of Liability Under §11 For Statements Of...

Today, SCOTUS issued its opinion in Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund. In the case, SCOTUS answers these questions: First, when can a statement of opinion be considered a “false...more

“Yeah, Well, That’s Just, Like, Your Opinion”:  Supreme Court Limits Securities Liability for Opinions in Omnicare

Echoing a famous epistemological observation from The Big Lebowski, the Supreme Court today rejected the argument, for the most part, that a statement of opinion stands on the same footing as a statement of fact.The Court...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Liability for Statements of Opinion in Registration Statements

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that a statement of opinion in a registration statement cannot be actionable as a misstatement of fact under § 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 if the issuer actually believed the opinion...more

Omnicare: Section 11 Liability and Opinions

The Supreme Court defined the circumstances under which liability can be imposed for opinion statements under Securities Act Section 11. Specifically, the Court held that such liability could be imposed on two theories: One...more

SEC to Vote on Regulation A+ this Wednesday Will State Law Preemption Survive?

On Friday, March 20, 2015, the SEC announced it will vote on its proposed changes to Regulation A at an open meeting on Wednesday, March 25, 2015. These changes are generally referred to as Regulation A+ and are meant to...more

Striking the Balance: Mary Jo White Says the SEC’s Process for “Well-Known Seasoned Issuer” Waivers Is Fair, But Signals a...

In a speech last Thursday, SEC Chair Mary Jo White publicly addressed the issue of whether the SEC has been too lax in granting waivers to large corporations that are subject to certain restrictions under the Well-Known...more

The Disqualification Provisions and the SEC’s Use of Wavers

One key debate regarding current SEC enforcement policy centers on the application of the so-called “bad actor” provisions. Previously the Commissioners split over the nature, use and application of those provisions. ...more

SEC Advised to “Do No Harm” to Accredited Investor Definition

At its meeting on March 4, the SEC’s Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging Companies approved its rather limited recommendations to update the definition of “accredited investor” as it applies to natural persons as found...more

What is a Security? Even the SEC Can’t Always Tell

On February 27, 2015, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) determined that, contrary to claims by the SEC, interests in an LLC that invested in conservation easements as a tax deduction mechanism were not “securities” within the...more

Citigroup, Goldman, and UBS to Pay $235 Million Settlement in MBS Class Action

On February 13, 2015, the plaintiffs in New Jersey Carpenters Health Fund, et al., v. Residential Capital, LLC, et al., No. 08-cv-8781 (S.D.N.Y.) filed an unopposed motion for certification of the class and to approve a...more

A Win for Nonsettling Defendants Facing Securities Act Claims

Nonsettling defendants that faced Securities Act claims were protected from disproportionate liability following a partial settlement. On February 3, Judge William H. Orrick of the U.S. District Court for the Northern...more

244 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 10