Entertainment Law Update Episode 160 – August/September 2023
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now - An IP Podcast: NIL – New NCAA Guidelines and State Law Implementation
AGG Talks: Background Screening - What is FCRA Preemption, and Why Should You Care?
- California state court held that federal forum provisions for Securities Act claims are not illegal and may be used to sidestep the bar on removal of Securities Act claims following the United States Supreme Court’s ruling...more
Big Oil repeatedly remanded to state courts - will SCOTUS come to the rescue? "Oil companies facing suits by state and local governments that want them to bear a share of the cost of responding to the consequences of...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently handed down three rulings potentially impacting bankruptcy cases. Nunc Pro Tunc Relief - In Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Juan v. Acevedo Feliciano, No. 18-921, 2020 WL 871715 (U.S....more
Ruling suggests a new means of stemming the flood tide of state-court Securities Act claims that followed the U.S. Supreme Court’s Cyan decision in 2018. But uncertainty lingers as to whether post-IPO public companies can...more
On February 24, 2020, the United States Supreme Court ruled in a case Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Juan v. Feliciano in connection with removal of a state court matter to Federal court, something that may have a...more
The U.S. Supreme Court in Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Juan, Puerto Rico v. Acevedo Feliciano, No. 18-921, 2020 WL 871715, at * (U.S. Feb. 24, 2020) in a per curiam opinion that turned on a state court’s jurisdiction...more
Several securities litigation trends over recent years show no signs of abating in 2020. Federal securities class action filings seem likely to remain at elevated levels. Last year, for the third consecutive year, more than...more
A defendant can utilize 28 U.S.C. § 1441 to remove a state court case to federal court where complete diversity of citizenship exists. But the statute includes restrictions that limit a defendant’s ability to remove a case to...more
On February 25, 2019, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Institute of Legal Reform (the “ILR”) published a report entitled “Containing the Contagion: Proposals to Reform the Broken Securities Class Action System” (the “Report”)....more
The District Court for the Northern District of New York handed down an unusual decision. The district court found that it had federal question jurisdiction even though the Plaintiff only asserted one claim in his Complaint:...more
On December 19, 2018, the Delaware Court of Chancery held that forum selection provisions contained in the certificate of incorporation of Delaware corporations are invalid to the extent that they require any claim under the...more
In Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund, No. 15-1439 (Mar. 20, 2018), the Supreme Court recently held that certain federal securities-law claims could proceed in state courts—despite the narrowing effect of...more
This month’s key California employment law cases are two decisions from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Chavez v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., 888 F.3d 413 (9th Cir. 2018) - Summary: Amount in controversy for federal...more
On March 20, 2018, the United States Supreme Court released its unanimous decision in Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund, 138 S.Ct. 1061 (2018). In Cyan, the Court considered whether plaintiffs can file...more
In 2017, federal securities class actions were filed at a rapid clip, averaging more than one per day – a level not seen in nearly 20 years according to survey data. It was the third year of growth and a 44% increase over...more
On March 20, 2018, a unanimous United States Supreme Court, in Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver Cty. Employees Ret. Fund, No. 15-1439, 2018 WL 1384564, answered two questions concerning investors' ability to pursue alleged violations of...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that class action plaintiffs can bring claims under the Securities Act of 1933 in either state or federal court. ...more
On March 20, 2018, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund, No. 15-1439, that securities plaintiffs could bring class actions under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities...more
In Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund, No. 15-1439, decided on March 20, 2018, the Supreme Court unanimously held that class actions based solely on the Securities Act of 1933 (33 Act) may be brought in...more
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision on March 20 holding that investors are free to file securities class action lawsuits challenging the veracity of stock registration statements under Section 11 of the...more
In recent years, plaintiffs increasingly have challenged initial public offerings by filing securities class actions in state courts, especially California, due to an unsettled jurisdictional question. In Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver...more
A unanimous Supreme Court recently held that “covered class actions” over exchange-traded securities are not removable from state courts under SLUSA when they assert only ‘33 Act claims....more
Last Tuesday, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Cyan Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund. The opinion by Justice Elena Kagan for a unanimous court answered two questions: Did the Securities Litigation...more
On March 20, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States, in a unanimous decision delivered by Justice Kagan, ruled that state courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate class actions brought under the Securities Act of 1933...more
In a boon for public company shareholder plaintiffs this week, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld state courts’ concurrent jurisdiction over securities class actions alleging violations of certain federal securities laws. The...more