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 30

The Circuits are split: are tangible benefits required for insider trading liability?
  • Latham & Watkins LLP
  • USA
  • July 10 2015

On July 6, 2015, United States District Court Judge Jed S. Rakoff authored a Ninth Circuit opinion that signalled increased skepticism about the


Trademark tacking: Supreme Court decides who decides
  • Latham & Watkins LLP
  • USA
  • February 6 2015

Trademark owners often update their marks and logos to adapt to the times and changing market conditions, or just to freshen up the brand. Indeed


Home Concrete: Supreme Court rejects agency attempt to overrule judicial precedent
  • Latham & Watkins LLP
  • USA
  • May 10 2012

In prior Client Alerts, the Latham & Watkins Tax Department detailed decisions by the Tax Court and the appellate courts regarding the IRS’s litigating position that an overstatement of basis is an “omission from gross income” that triggers the extended six-year limitations period under IRC Sections 6229(c)(2) and 6501(e)(1)(A) for assessing tax.


Seventh Circuit disagrees with Philadelphia Newspapers and finds that credit bidding required for asset sales in bankruptcy plans
  • Latham & Watkins LLP
  • USA
  • July 18 2011

When entering into secured transactions, most secured lenders long assumed that, even in a bankruptcy, their borrowers would not be able to sell encumbered assets free and clear of the lenders’ liens without the lenders’ consent or, without at least providing the lenders the opportunity to bid their secured debt at an auction.


Supreme Court reverses Fifth Circuit by ruling that securities fraud plaintiffs need not prove loss causation to obtain class certification
  • Latham & Watkins LLP
  • USA
  • June 14 2011

On June 6, 2011, the United States Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, narrowly held that plaintiffs need not show loss causation to certify a class in Section 10(b) securities fraud class actions.


Second Circuit wades into the PSLRA safe harbor - the lessons of Slayton v. American Express for forward-looking statements
  • Latham & Watkins LLP
  • USA
  • June 10 2010

The Second Circuit has issued its first opinion analyzing the 15 year-old safe harbor provision in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) for forward-looking statements that become the subject of a Rule 10b-5 lawsuit.


Joel H. Trotter
  • Latham & Watkins LLP

Perry J. Viscounty
  • Latham & Watkins LLP

Kevin H. Metz
  • Latham & Watkins LLP

Matthew L. Warren
  • Latham & Watkins LLP