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 128

International highlights

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • European Union, United Kingdom, USA
  • -
  • January 9 2008

On 19 December 2007, the UK's Office of Fair Trading ("OFT") announced that it had charged three UK businessmen with cartel offences under the Enterprise Act 2002

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

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 allows reinstatement of criminal fraud charges against defendants who voluntarily cooperated with SEC investigators

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 30 2008

In United States v. Stringer, 2008 WL 901563 (9th Cir. Apr. 4, 2008), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit vacated a final order of the United States District Court for the District of Oregon that had dismissed criminal indictments against three individual defendants

Amicus brief filed in U.S. Supreme Court to support reversal of decision holding that any government contract tainted by fraud is void from the outset

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 30 2008

On April 30, 2008, the National Defense Industrial Association -- a trade association whose membership includes 1300 defense contractors, many of whom are small businesses -- filed an amicus curiae brief in support of a petition for a writ of certiorari at the U.S. Supreme Court

Ninth Circuit reaffirms particularity requirement in securities fraud actions for pleading scienter

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 3 2009

In Zucco Partners, LLC v. Digimarc Corp., 2009 WL 57081 (9th Cir. Jan. 12, 2009), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reaffirmed that when pleading a claim for securities fraud under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “Reform Act”), plaintiffs are bound by prior Ninth Circuit authority that requires them to plead particularized facts giving rise to a strong inference that defendants knew, or were deliberately reckless in not knowing, that their statements were false when made

Ninth Circuit declines application of loss causation principles in Dura Pharmaceuticals in connection with criminal securities fraud

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 9 2009

In United States v. Berger, No. 08-50171, 2009 WL 4141478 (9th Cir. Nov. 30, 2009), a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit declined to apply loss causation principles in civil securities fraud litigation established by the United States Supreme Court in Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo, 544 U.S. 336, 342-48 (2005), in connection with the sentencing of a defendant in a criminal securities fraud prosecution

Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's ... or else: the expansion of False Claims Act liability to the retention of overpayments

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 11 2009

On May 29, 2009, President Obama signed into law the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 ("FERA"

Tenth Circuit holds corporate shareholders do not have standing under RICO to sue derivatively for alleged injuries to corporation

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 8 2010

In Bixler v. Foster, No. 09-2138, 2010 WL 597477 (10th Cir. Feb. 22, 2010), the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a class action lawsuit brought by minority shareholders of Mineral Energy and Technology Corporation (“METCO”) against its directors and lawyers

Ninth Circuit reaffirms existing precedent on materiality and "motive and opportunity" scienter allegations

  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 7 2009

In Siracusano v. Matrixx Initiatives, Inc., 2009 WL 3448282 (9th Cir. Oct. 28, 2009), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded a decision by the United States District Court for the District of Arizona granting defendant Matrixx Initiatives, Inc.’s (“Matrix”) motion to dismiss a putative securities fraud class action brought under Section 10(b) of Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Jurisdiction

Workarea

© Copyright 2006-2013 Globe Business Publishing Ltd | Cookies | Disclaimer | Privacy policy