News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court Hears Argument in Potentially Game-Changing Securities Law Case

On March 5, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court heard argument in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund. The outcome of this case may change the landscape for securities class actions. The issue in Halliburton is whether the fraud on...more

Can Absence of Price Impact Defeat Class Certification? Supreme Court to Decide

Can a corporation defending against a stock fraud class action defeat class certification by using evidence that its actions had no effect on the stock’s price? In Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., Docket No....more

U.S. Supreme Court to Reconsider "Fraud-on-the-Market" Presumption in Securities Fraud Class Actions

On November 15, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it would revisit the "fraud-on-the-market" presumption that it adopted 25 years ago, which substantially expanded securities fraud class actions. The appeal in which...more

Will Securities Fraud Class Actions Fade Into History?

The U.S. Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari in Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, No. 13-317, suggests a dramatic change in private securities litigation is possible. On November 15, 2013, the Court accepted...more

Is the United States Supreme Court Poised to Overrule or Modify Basic Inc. v. Levinson?

On November 15, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a petition for writ of certiorari to Petitioner Halliburton Company (“Halliburton”) in the case entitled Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., f/k/a Archdiocese of...more

Not So Basic Supreme Court to Revisit the Fraud-­on-­the Market Presumption of Reliance

Parties to pending securities fraud class actions may adjust litigation strategies, even before the Court revisits Basic’s presumption of investor reliance. On Friday, November 15, 2013, the Supreme Court granted...more

Basic Is Anything But: Courts Continue to Wrangle with the Fraud-on-the-Market Presumption

It has been 25 years since the Supreme Court announced the fraud-on-the-market presumption of reliance in Basic Inc. v. Levinson, 485 U.S. 224 (1988). Yet many courts, including the Supreme Court itself, continue to struggle...more

June 2013: Securities Litigation Update - Supreme Court Rejects the Need to Prove “Materiality” for Class Certification in...

Resolving a split among several circuits, the U.S. Supreme Court in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans & Trust Funds, 133 S.Ct. 1184 (2013), held that plaintiffs are not required to demonstrate that misrepresentations...more

9th Circuit Holds Section 10(b) Violations Sufficient For ERISA Breach Of Duty Claims

A decision issued yesterday by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals illustrates the peril that can inhere in offering a company stock alternative in a plan governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). ...more

Supreme Court's Decision Reshapes Class Certification for Future Securities Class Actions

On February 27, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed a long-standing circuit split on the issue of whether, when bringing a securities fraud class action under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, a...more

Supreme Court Eases Burden for Securities Class Action Plaintiffs

The U.S. Supreme Court recently rejected the need for plaintiffs to prove materiality at the class certification stage in federal securities fraud class actions, thus allowing shareholders of Amgen to proceed as a class in a...more

The Material Impact of the Amgen Decision on D&O Insurance

In Amgen, Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds, No. 11-1085 (Slip Op. Feb. 27, 2013), the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 majority opinion (Ginsburg, J.), affirmed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit’s...more

United States Supreme Court Holds that Class Action Securities Fraud Plaintiffs Need Not Prove the Materiality of the Alleged...

In Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans & Trust Funds, No. 11-1085, ___ WL ______ (U.S. Feb. 27, 2013), the United States Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit...more

Life Sciences Companies Should Protect Themselves Against Increased Exposure to Costly Securities Fraud Lawsuits After Supreme...

What you need to know: The Supreme Court recently found that defendants in class action securities fraud lawsuits will not be able to challenge the materiality of allegedly fraudulent misstatements or omissions at the...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

Plausible Allegations – Not Proof – Of Materiality All That’s Required For Class Certification in Securities Fraud Suits, Says...

In its ruling on February 27, in Amgen, Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans & Trust Funds (No. 11-1085), the first of several highly anticipated class action decisions that impact securities class action litigation going...more

Supreme Court Update: Two Securities Law Decisions This Week, and Another to Come

The United States Supreme Court has taken a keen interest in the securities arena this current term, agreeing to hear at least three cases (of only approximately 70 in total). This week, the Supreme Court announced decisions...more

Shareholder Plaintiffs Score A Class Certification Win From SCOTUS

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Amgen, Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans. In a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Ginsburg, the Supreme Court handed a win to plaintiffs in securities fraud class...more

Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans And Trust Funds: Does Supreme Court Put “Cart Before The Horse” To Satisfy Predominance...

To best understand this decision, we need to look at the rules concerning both class actions and securities: - According to Rule 23(b)(3), a class action may be maintained if the court finds that questions of law or...more

Materiality Can Wait, Says the Supreme Court in Amgen

The following post is reprinted with permission from Paul Karlsgodt’s blog, www.classactionblawg.com. The Supreme Court has issued its opinion in one of the most highly anticipated class action-related cases on the...more

First Take on Amgen Decision: Supreme Court “Basically” Endorses Status Quo

The Supreme Court released its anxiously awaited decision in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans yesterday. On the face of the decision, it was a loss for defendants in that case, and for companies everywhere that are...more

Supreme Court Holds That Securities Fraud Plaintiffs Do Not Have to Prove Materiality to Certify a Class

The Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated decision today in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds, No. 11-1085, 568 U.S. __ (2013), affirming the Ninth Circuit and holding that securities class action...more

Legal Alert: Supreme Court Decides Materiality Need Not Be Demonstrated for Class Certification

This morning the United States Supreme Court affirmed class certification in Amgen, Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds , a securities fraud case. The question presented was whether plaintiffs seeking class...more

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Need to Prove Materiality at Class-Certification Stage in Securities Class Actions

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on February 27, 2013 that a plaintiff need not prove materiality as a prerequisite to obtaining class certification in a securities class action. The Court's ruling in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut...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

25 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1