Supreme Court holds that statute of limitations applicable to securities and Exchange Commission matters begins to run on date of misconduct *

USA - March 1 2013
There is a general statute of limitations that applies to many penalty provisions in the U.S. Code, including civil penalties imposed by the U.S…

Co-authors: Philippe M. Salomon, Rebecca L. Avrutin, James V. Masella III, Michelle Gitlitz Courtney, Kevin M. Passerini.

The Supreme Court's Amgen decision: proof of materiality is not a prerequisite to certification of a securities fraud class action *

USA - February 28 2013
On February 27, 2013, six justices of the U.S. Supreme Court joined to hold that, in order for a class to be certified, plaintiffs in a securities…

Co-authors: Philippe M. Salomon, James V. Masella III, Michelle Gitlitz Courtney, Kevin M. Passerini.

New York’s highest court holds that common law causes of action are not preempted by the Martin Act *

USA - December 23 2011
On Tuesday, December 20, 2011, New York’s Court of Appeals issued a groundbreaking decision holding that a plaintiff’s common-law claims for breach of fiduciary duty and gross negligence against a securities firm were not preempted by the Martin Act—New York’s “blue sky” law.

Co-authors: Philippe M. Salomon, James V. Masella III, Michelle Gitlitz Courtney.

Supreme Court confirms that the failure to disclose adverse reports may be materially misleading but rejects statistical significance as bright-line test for materiality and scienter *

USA - March 31 2011
On March 22, 2011, in Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano, -- S.Ct. --, 2011 WL 977060 (Mar. 22, 2011), the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision ruling that reports of adverse events concerning a pharmaceutical company’s product may be sufficiently “material” under the federal securities laws.

Co-authors: Philippe M. Salomon, James V. Masella III, Joseph O. Click, Jeremy Reiss, Harris N. Cogan.