We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Michelle Gitlitz Courtney Blank Rome LLP

Results 1 to 5 of 5



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, Evan H. Lechtman , Rebecca L. Avrutin, James V. Masella III, 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, Evan H. Lechtman , James V. Masella III, Kevin M. Passerini.


Court approves use of technology that dramatically cuts cost of discovery *

USA - April 30 2012
The early stages of large litigations have long been consumed by manual document review—namely—junior lawyers who spend weeks or months culling through mountains of documents at great expense to the client.

Co-authors: Ryan Cronin, James V. Masella III.


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, Evan H. Lechtman , James V. Masella III.


Ethical electronics: new guidance on protecting the confidentiality of attorney-client emails *

USA - November 15 2011
On August 4, 2011, the American Bar Association (the “ABA”) issued Formal Opinion 11-459 (the “Opinion”), stating that lawyers have a duty to warn their clients not to use a workplace computer, network, or device to communicate with their personal lawyer. 

Co-authors: Joseph G. Poluka.