On January 21st, the First Circuit addressed the relationship between scienter and the materiality of an alleged omission in a class action securities fraud case. Defendants allegedly failed to disclose that regulations in an important market would lessen demand for their product. Affirming dismissal, the First Circuit held that the inferences are stronger that defendants did not knowingly or recklessly mislead investors, as defendants reasonably did not expect the regulatory change to have a significant impact on overall sales. Inter-Local Pension Fund GCC/IBT v. Waters Corp.
Register Now As you are not an existing subscriber please register for your free daily legal newsfeed service.Register
If you have any questions about the service please contact email@example.com or call Lexology Customer Services on +44 20 7234 0606.
Scienter and the materiality of an alleged omission
- Winston & Strawn LLP
- January 24 2011
If you are interested in submitting an article to Lexology, please contact Andrew Teague at firstname.lastname@example.org.
PHD, a division of The Fuel Logistics Group (Pty) Ltd