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.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 5,710

Novastar plaintiffs appeal subprime dismissal

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 30 2008

In early 2007, a purported class of investors in NovaStar Financial Corporation, a residential mortgage lender that made a percentage of its loans to subprime borrowers, sued NovaStar and certain of its directors and officers in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri

S.D.N.Y. dismissal in Amex indicates how courts should analyze suits spawned by credit crisis

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 1 2008

The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York recently dismissed for a second time a federal securities class action against American Express Co. (“Amex”

Update on Lehman Brothers insolvency proceedings in the US, UK and Japan

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • Japan, United Kingdom, USA
  • -
  • October 7 2008

On September 20, 2008, the Bankruptcy Court approved the sale of certain assets of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. ("LBHI") and Lehman Brothers Inc. ("LBI"), including those related to its Canadian Capital Markets and Investment Banking businesses, to Barclays Capital, Inc. ("Barclays"

Mere allegations regarding management’s knowledge of “core operations” fail to satisfy the scienter pleading requirement

  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 8 2008

In a recent decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals considered the following question: whether allegations that the defendants had knowledge of a company’s “core operations” could be used to satisfy the requirement of pleading fraudulent intent or “scienter” under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act

Third Circuit reverses controversial Section 16(b) decision.

  • Hogan Lovells
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 10 2008

On October 1, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed its controversial decision in 2002 in Levy v. Sterling Holding Co., LLC restricting the availability of two important exemptions from Section 16(b) of the Exchange Act, which requires disgorgement of “short-swing” trading profits realized by public company insiders

Eighth Circuit holds that sheer number of GAAP violations does not give rise to a strong inference of scienter

  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 7 2008

In In re Ceridian Corp. Sec. Litig., __ F.3d ___, No. 07-2707, 2008 WL 4163782 (8th Cir. Sept. 11, 2008), plaintiffs filed a securities class action complaint accusing the company and certain of its officers of “a massive accounting scheme to inflate Ceridian’s financial results and its stock price by exploiting a weak or corrupt system of internal controls to commit numerous violations of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).”

Series of criminal securities prosecutions collapse when Second Circuit rules that 10b-5 violation requires an act that conveys a false impression

  • Day Pitney LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 10 2008

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the acquittal of David Finnerty, an NYSE specialist criminally indicted for allegedly engaging in interpositioning

SEC adequately pleads aiding and abetting violations against officer of a vendor that sold goods to a primary violator

  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 10 2008

A federal district court in Washington, D.C. has held that the Securities and Exchange Commission adequately pled that the owner of a company that sold certain products to a corporate subsidiary aided and abetted the subsidiary’s violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by signing and returning audit confirmation letters that he knew, or was reckless in not knowing, were materially false by understating promotional allowances

Court upholds removal of 1933 act claims under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005

  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 15 2008

The District Court for the Southern District of New York recently upheld the removal to federal court of a complaint alleging violations of the Securities Act of 1933 under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”

SEC lacks authority to seek monetary penalties

  • Jorden Burt LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 15 2008

In the case of SEC v. Steven M. Bolla, et al., the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia recently held that the SEC is not authorized to seek monetary penalties against aiders and abettors of violations of the Investment Advisers Act in an action brought in federal court