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

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 45

Second Circuit holds that "interpositioning" transactions do not constitute deceptive acts to support criminal securities fraud liability

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 5 2008

In United States v. Finnerty, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 15296 (2d Cir. July 18, 2008), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit set aside a guilty verdict imposing securities fraud liability against a New York Stock Exchange Specialist who engaged in “interpositioning” and “trading ahead” transactions, on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove that the defendant’s conduct constituted deceptive conduct under the federal securities laws

Ninth Circuit affirms dismissal with prejudice of Corinthian Colleges securities fraud class action

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 5 2008

In Metzler Investment GMBH v. Corinthian Colleges, Inc., 2008 WL 2853402 (9th Cir. July 25, 2008), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal with prejudice of a securities fraud class action, holding that plaintiffs had failed to plead the essential elements of loss causation, scienter and falsity consistent with the requirements of prevailing Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit authority

Supreme Court severely limits secondary actors' exposure to securities fraud lawsuits

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 17 2008

In Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 2008 WL 123801 (U.S. Jan. 15, 2008) (Kennedy, J.), the Supreme Court rejected an attempt by a class action plaintiff to assert securities fraud claims against suppliers and customers of an issuer in whose stock the plaintiff invested

Ninth Circuit allows SEC to proceed against director for insider trading even where director owed no fiduciary duty to company whose stock he traded

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 8 2008

In SEC v. Talbot, 2008 WL 2574513 (9th Cir. June 30, 2008), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a board member could be liable for insider trading under the “misappropriation theory” where the board member owed no fiduciary duty to the company whose stock he traded

Second Circuit rejects "collective scienter" theory for pleading a securities fraud claim against a corporation

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 17 2008

In Teamsters Local 445 Freight Division Pension Fund v. Dynex Capital Inc., 2008 WL 2521676 (2d Cir. June 26, 2008), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that in order to state a claim for securities fraud against a corporate defendant, plaintiffs may not rely upon the theory of “collective scienter,” but instead must plead a strong inference of scienter by the individual “who was responsible for the allegedly false or misleading statements made” by or on behalf of the corporation

Ninth Circuit reaffirms that the "core operations inference," standing alone, is insufficient to support a strong inference of scienter in securities fraud actions

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 23 2008

In South Ferry LP, 2 v. Killinger, 2008 WL 4138237 (9th Cir. Sept. 9, 2008), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that inferring scienter based upon nothing more than defendants’ senior management positions in a company does not satisfy the heightened pleading standards of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “Reform Act”

Ninth Circuit reverses dismissal of securities fraud complaint on loss causation grounds despite three-month delay between corrective disclosure and market reaction

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 22 2008

In In re Gilead Sciences Securities Litigation, 536 F.3d 1049 (9th Cir. 2008), a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the dismissal of a securities fraud complaint that the district court had held failed to plead loss causation due to the passage of time between the disclosure of the alleged fraud and the drop in the company’s stock price

Ninth Circuit rejects theory of "collective scienter" and reaffirms pre-Tellabs authority applying heightened requirements for pleading scienter in securities fraud actions

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 4 2008

In Glazer Capital Management, LP v. Magistri, 2008 WL 5003306 (9th Cir. Nov. 26, 2008), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that when pleading scienter as to a corporate defendant, the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “Reform Act”) “requires plaintiff to plead scienter with respect to those individuals who actually made the false statements.”

Third Circuit rejects the "fraud-created-the-market" theory of reliance in a Section 10(b) private securities fraud action

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 20 2010

In Malack v BDO Seidman, LLP, No 09-4475, 2010 WL 3211088 (3d Cir Aug 16, 2010), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit declined to recognize a presumption of reliance based upon the so-called “fraud-created-the-market” theory to state a claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78j(b), and, consequently, satisfy the predominance requirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) for certifying a class

Second Circuit rejects application of "bespeaks caution" doctrine to statement containing both historical and forward-looking elements

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 28 2010

In Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System v MF Global, Ltd, No 09-3919, 2010 WL 3547602 (2d Cir Sept 14, 2010), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated the dismissal of plaintiffs' securities fraud claims and remanded the case to the district court, holding that the district court applied the "bespeaks caution" doctrine erroneously to statements that contained both present and future elements