Investors seeking recompense from third parties that manipulate the stock prices of public companies were dealt a blow on Tuesday by the U.S. Supreme Court, which dismissed a complaint filed by investors of Charter Communications against two suppliers, Motorola and Scientific-Atlanta. Those investors had alleged that these suppliers acted in concert with Charter to inflate the cable company’s stock price, thereby deceiving investors. The closely-watched decision won the plaudits of manufacturers, suppliers, banks, accountants, and other concerns that do business with corporations accused of engaging in securities fraud. Justice Anthony Kennedy, the author of the court’s majority opinion, commented that a decision in favor of the plaintiffs could have “[raised] the cost of being a publicly-traded company under our law and [shifted] securities offerings away from domestic capital markets.” In the case before the high court, Charter was alleged to have overpaid Motorola and Scientific-Atlanta $17 million for cable set-top boxes for the purpose of providing the two vendors with extra funds with which they could purchase advertising from Charter. Charter reported the resulting advertising receipts as revenues. In turn, Motorola and Scientific-Atlanta backdated the set-top box contracts. Scientific-Atlanta and Motorola maintained that they could not be held liable for misstatements in Charter’s revenues as they had no role in “the preparation or review of Charter’s financial statements.” By a 5-3 vote in which Justice Stephen Breyer declined to participate, the Supreme Court agreed with the vendors, concluding that, “in these circumstances, the investors cannot be said to have relied upon any of the respondents’ deceptive acts in the decision to purchase or sell securities” as “no member of the investing public had knowledge” of those acts.