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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 184

Second Circuit applies Morrison v. National Australia Bank to allow certain extraterritorial application of RICO
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • Australia, USA
  • May 9 2014

In European Community v. RJR Nabisco, Inc., Case No. 11-CV-2475 (2d Cir. Apr. 23, 2014), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit


Second Circuit reverses order disqualifying defense counsel in suit over demutualization of insurance company
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • October 13 2009

In Murray v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., No. 09-3716-CV, 2009 WL 3080462 (2d Cir. Sept. 29, 2009), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed an order by the district court disqualifying defense counsel for a life insurance company in an action alleging fraud in connection with the demutualization of defendant life insurance company


Eleventh Circuit reverses in part securities fraud judgment against clearing broker in an action brought by the SEC
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • June 18 2012

In Securities & Exchange Commission v. Goble, 2012 WL 1918819 (11th Cir. May 29, 2012), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that the recording of a sham transaction in the corporate books did not constitute “securities fraud” in violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), 15 U.S.C. 78j(b), and Securities & Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5, because “a misrepresentation that would only influence an individual’s choice of broker-dealers cannot form the basis for 10(b) securities fraud liability.”


Be careful what you warrant and represent in your deal documents; you may be liable to a sophisticated party for fraudulent inducement even when that party fails to conduct due diligence or was on notice of potential problems
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • September 8 2010

In MBIA Insurance Corporation v Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, DLJ Mortgage Capital, Inc, and Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc, Index No 6037512009 (Sup Ct, NY County, Aug 9, 2010), Justice Shirley Werner Kornreich denied, in large part, the defendants' motion to dismiss fraudulent inducement and breach of contract claims based on certain representations and warranties provided to the plaintiff in the parties' deal documents


Second Circuit affirms conviction for unlicensed money transmitting based on Chilean company's use of U.S. bank accounts
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • October 6 2010

On September 22, 2010, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the conviction and 42-month sentence of Mauricio Alfonso Mazza-Alaluf ("Mazza-Alaluf"), a Chilean national, for conspiring to operate and actually operating an unlicensed money transmitting business based upon his company's use of bank accounts in the United States


United States Supreme Court holds that the "maker" of a statement for Rule 10b-5 purposes is the person or entity with ultimate authority over the statement
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • June 20 2011

In Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders, No. 09-525, 2011 WL 2297762 (U.S. Jun. 13, 2011) (Thomas, J.), the United States Supreme Court held that purposes of a securities fraud claim under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), 15 U.S.C. 78j(b), and Rule 10b-5 , 17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5, promulgated thereunder, the “maker” of an allegedly false or misleading statement is the person or entity with ultimate authority over the statement, including its content and whether and how to communicate it


U.S. Supreme Court decision gives more latitude to defeat securities fraud class action lawsuits prior to class certification
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • June 25 2014

In Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., No. 13-317, __ S Ct. __, 2014 WL 2807181 (U.S. June 23, 2014), the United States Supreme Court


Second Circuit limits “tippee” insider trading liability
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • December 11 2014

In United States v. Newman, No. 13-1837 (2d Cir. Dec. 10, 2014), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the 2013


Arab Bank found liable for transactions under the Anti-Terrorism Act
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • October 9 2014

On September 22, 2014, a Brooklyn jury found Arab Bank, Jordan's largest lender, guilty of violating the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act for providing


Second Circuit holds that federal common law prohibits trading by insiders of a Cayman Islands corporation while in possession of material nonpublic information
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • Cayman Islands, USA
  • February 4 2014

In Steginsky v. Xcelera Inc., Nos. 13-1327-cv, 13-1892-cv, 2014 WL 274419 (2d Cir. Jan. 27, 2014), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second