The Credit Default Swap Settlement - Antitrust Cases Provide Recovery Opportunities for Institutional Investors
November 5, 2015 | Blog | By Joel Rothman
Recently, class plaintiffs moved for the preliminary approval of a $1.865 billion settlement of the Credit Default Swap Antitrust Litigation.
October 15, 2015 | Blog | By Terry McMahon
A recent motion to dismiss filed by the defendants in the In re Petrobras Securities Litigation, No. 14-cv-9662 (S.D.N.Y.) consolidated litigation challenges the standing of several institutional opt-out plaintiffs.
September 29, 2015 | Blog
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, while seldom used in the past, has been increasingly used by institutional investors in suits against banks and other entities.
U.S. Courts Continue to Deny Attempts to Bring Foreign Law Actions in U.S. Courts to Recover for Potential Losses in Foreign Transactions
September 16, 2015 | Blog | By Joel Rothman
As we have mentioned previously, in the wake of Morrison v. National Australia Bank, securities plaintiffs are no longer able to assert claims under the U.S. securities laws to recover potential losses for transactions that occur on non-U.S. exchanges.
September 2, 2015 | Blog | By Terry McMahon
We previously reported on what we thought at the time were “unusual” arguments from Vivendi Universal, S.A. (“Vivendi”) in its summary judgment motion in opposition to the recovery of certain class-action members in the long-running In re Vivendi Universal, S.A. Securities Litigation, 02 Civ. 5571 (SAS) (S.D.N.Y.).
UPDATE - First Circuit Upholds Method of Distribution of Notice in Hill v. State Street Corp., But Cautions Against Practice of Delivering Late Notice to Small Investors
August 11, 2015 | Blog | By John Nucci
The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit recently issued a summary dismissal denying a number of objections to the Settlement Agreement reached in Hill v. State Street Corporation.
D.C. Circuit Holds "Boilerplate" Forward-Looking Statements Are Not Entitled to PSLRA's "Safe Harbor"
August 4, 2015 | Blog | By Joel Rothman
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently reversed the dismissal of a securities fraud class action against Harman International Industries Inc., holding that the “safe harbor” for forward looking statements did not apply to the statements at issue. In re Harman Int’l Inds., Inc. Sec. Litig., -- F.3d --, No. 14-7017 (D.C.Cir. June 23, 2015).
July 23, 2015 | Blog | By Joel Rothman
With the increasing barriers to successfully prosecuting a securities fraud case in the United States, including the jurisdictional limitations caused by the Morrison decision, institutional investors are sometimes now looking to other jurisdictions to sometime recover their losses.
July 8, 2015 | Blog | By John Nucci
The Southern District of Ohio recently reached an interesting decision that may be relevant to institutional investors in Pharos Capital Partners, L.P. v. Touche, L.L.P. (In re Nat’l Century Fin. Enters.), 905 F. Supp. 2d 814 (S.D. Ohio 2012).
June 24, 2015 | Blog | By John Nucci
The United States Court of Federal Claims recently issued an Order in Starr International Company, Inc. v. United States, No. 11-779C, regarding the consequences of an intentional waiver of the attorney-client privilege by the United States Government.
UPDATE: Vivendi Employs Creative Arguments on Damages and the Fraud-on-the-Market Theory to Prevent Class Recovery
June 18, 2015 | Blog | By Terry McMahon
We posted on June 11 about some novel arguments used by Vivendi Universal, S.A. (“Vivendi”) as part of its defense against Southeastern Asset Management, Inc. (“Southeastern”), a class member in In re Vivendi Universal, S.A. Securities Litigation, 02 Civ. 5571 (SAS) (S.D.N.Y.).
Vivendi Employs Creative Arguments on Damages and the Fraud-on-the-Market Theory to Prevent Class Recovery
June 11, 2015 | Blog | By Terry McMahon
The long-running In re Vivendi Universal, S.A. Securities Litigation, 02 Civ. 5571 (SAS) (S.D.N.Y.), recently took an interesting turn as defendant Vivendi Universal, S.A. has deployed some unusual arguments in opposing the recovery of certain class-action members.
Court Denies Objection to Timeliness of Class Action Settlement Notice Where Method of Dissemination Was Reasonable
June 4, 2015 | Blog | By John Nucci
A Magistrate Judge for the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts recently issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") on the Lead Plaintiffs’ Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Plan of Allocation in Hill v. State Street Corporation.
May 14, 2015 | Blog | By Joel Rothman
On March 19, 2015, in what can be characterized as terse and sternly worded Memorandum Order (the “Order”), Judge Swain of the Southern District denied a Motion to Sever Individual Claims (the “Motion to Sever”) filed by three funds managed by D. E. Shaw & Co (the “D. E. Shaw Funds”).
May 13, 2015 | Blog
In the context of our representation of institutional investors, our experience reveals that they have been confronting an increasingly difficult process in recovering their losses from alleged violations of securities laws.
Chancellor Strine Issues Important Decision Validating Board Adoption of Forum Selection Clause in Bylaws
July 3, 2013 | Alert | By John Sylvia
On June 25, 2013, Delaware Chancellor Strine issued a fulsome opinion upholding the power of Delaware boards to amend corporate bylaws to include binding forum selection provisions.
Federal Court Rules That Issuers Face Strict Liability for Erroneous Statements About Legal Compliance in Registration Statements, Even if They Did Not Know the Statements Were False
June 11, 2013 | Advisory | By Megan Gates, Kevin McGinty, Chip Phinney, Michael Connolly
A recent federal appeals court decision addressing pleading standards for shareholder suits under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, highlights the potential dangers of giving broad assurances of legal compliance in registration statements.
July 25, 1998 | Alert
Mintz's Class Action Monitoring and Recovery practice represents mutual funds, institutional investors, public pension funds, trusts, investment advisors, and individuals as claimants in securities and antitrust class actions and regulatory settlements throughout the nation.
Explore Other Viewpoints:
- Arbitration, Mediation & Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Bankruptcy & Restructuring
- Class Action
- Complex Commercial Litigation
- Consumer Product Safety
- Debt Financing
- EB-5 Financing
- Education & Nonprofits
- Employment, Labor & Benefits
- Energy & Sustainability
- Environmental Enforcement Defense
- Environmental Law
- FDA Regulatory
- Federal Circuit Appeals
- Financial Institution Litigation
- Government Law
- Health Care
- Health Care Compliance, Fraud and Abuse, & Regulatory Counseling
- Health Care Enforcement & Investigations
- Health Care Transactions
- Health Information Privacy & Security
- IP Due Diligence
- IPR's & Other Post Grant Proceedings
- Insolvency & Creditor Rights Litigation
- Institutional Investor Class Action Recovery
- Insurance & Financial Services
- Insurance Consulting & Risk Management
- Insurance and Reinsurance Problem-Solving & Dispute Resolution
- Intellectual Property
- Investment Funds
- Licensing & Technology Transactions
- Life Sciences
- Litigation & Investigations
- M&A Litigation
- ML Strategies
- Medicare, Medicaid and Commercial Coverage & Reimbursement
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- Patent Litigation
- Patent Prosecution & Strategic Counseling
- Privacy & Cybersecurity
- Private Client
- Private Equity
- Products Liability & Complex Tort
- Project Development & Finance
- Public Finance
- Real Estate Litigation
- Real Estate Transactions
- Real Estate, Construction & Infrastructure
- Retail & Consumer Products
- Securities & Capital Markets
- Securities Litigation
- Sports & Entertainment
- Strategic IP Monetization & Licensing
- Trade Secrets
- Trademark & Copyright
- Trademark Litigation
- Venture Capital & Emerging Companies
- White Collar Defense & Government Investigations