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

Refine your search

Content type
Tags
Firm name
Author
Jurisdiction

291 results found

Article

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP | USA | 4 Feb 2011

Delaware Supreme Court reverses Chancery Court dismissal of derivative plaintiff's Section 220 books and records action

In King v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., No. 330, 2010, 2011 WL 284966 (Del. Jan. 28, 2011), the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware reversed a decision by the Court of Chancery dismissing a derivative plaintiff’s action under Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law seeking books and records of a Delaware corporation.

Article

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP | USA | 2 Feb 2011

District of Columbia Circuit holds that certifications in financial statements do not constitute omissions that qualify for a presumption of reliance in fraud claims under Rule 10b-5

In In re InterBank Funding Corp. Securities Litigation, No. 09-7167, --- F.3d ----, 2010 WL 5299882 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 28, 2010), the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed the dismissal with prejudice of a class action asserting securities fraud claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78j(b), and Rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5, based upon a failure to adequately plead the essential element of reliance. The sole issue before the Court was whether the fraud allegations in the complaint involved material omissions, which would allow plaintiffs to invoke the presumption of reliance established by the United States Supreme Court in Affiliated Ute Citizens v. United States, 406 U.S. 128 (1972).

Article

Mayer Brown | USA | 19 Jan 2011

Southern District of New York requires allegation of scienter in securities claims against Barclays Bank

In early January 2011, Judge Paul A. Crotty of the District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed with prejudice a federal securities class action against Barclays, several of Barclays’ senior officers and a dozen other investment banks.

Article

Lane Powell PC | USA | 5 Jan 2010

Broadcom: lessons from the frenzy over stock options backdating

Last month, a federal judge in Santa Ana, Calif., dismissed with prejudice federal criminal fraud charges against several Broadcom Corp. executives and essentially terminated one of the last of the stock options backdating cases brought by federal prosecutors.

Article

Alston & Bird LLP | USA | 6 Mar 2009

Ninth Circuit applies Stoneridge to affirm dismissal of claims against accounting firm

The Ninth Circuit recently ruled that an accounting firm could not be held liable under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 where the plaintiff was unable to show that the defendant participated in any 'deceptive acts' that were communicated to the public.

Article

Alston & Bird LLP | USA | 16 Jan 2008

Supreme Court rejects plaintiffs’ “scheme liability” theory under the federal securities laws

On January 15, 2008, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Stoneridge Investment Partners LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc. and Motorola, Inc.

Previous page 1 2 3 ...