On July 25, 2015, the Honorable Barbara M. Lynn of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas entered the much anticipated
In another significant federal court decision on the loss causation element of federal securities fraud claims, last week U.S. District Judge Ursula Ungaro (S.D. Florida) overturned a jury verdict for Plaintiffs in the securities fraud class action suit, In re BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc. Sec. Litig., No. 07-Civ-61542 (UU).
The road to recovery for shareholders of failed banks and other companies that lost value in the wake of the Great Recession just got a lot tougher.
On August 19, 2010, District Court Judge Thomas Thrash of the Northern District of Georgia dismissed a putative class action filed against SunTrust and certain of its officers and directors based on the plaintiff's failure to plead multiple required elements of a securities fraud claim.
Yesterday, a federal judge preliminary approved a $125 million cash settlement for former shareholders of New Century Financial Corp.
In a recent decision issued by the District of Connecticut, Coyne v. General Electric Co., No. 3:08-cv-01135-SRU, 2010 WL 2836730 (Jul. 15, 2010), the Court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint, which alleged securities fraud and violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“1934 Act”).
In a recent decision dismissing a Rule 10b-5 claim brought by investors, Local No. 38 IBEW Pension Fund v. American Express Co., 2010 WL 2834226 (S.D.N.Y. July 19, 2010), the Southern District of New York discussed at some length the role of confidential witnesses and the level of detail required for such witnesses.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued its decision in a so-called “foreign cubed” securities case, Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., No. 08-1191, 2010 WL 2518523 (U.S. June 24, 2010).
In a recent decision affirming the dismissal of investors’ securities fraud claims, In re Cutera Securities Litigation, No. 08-17627, 2010 WL 2595281 (9th Cir. Feb. 11, 2010), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals clarified its construction of the safe harbor provision of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act.
In Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., 552 U.S. 148 (2008), the Supreme Court affirmed what had long been the law namely, that there was no private right of action for aiding and abetting liability under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”).