The United States Supreme Court heard arguments earlier this month in three important securities cases regarding the preemptive scope of the federal securities laws. At issue is the meaning of the phrase “in connection with the purchase or sale of a covered security” under the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (“SLUSA”) ...
InLagos v. United States, 584 U.S. ___ (2018), the Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling that limits the ability of corporate victims of fraud to seek reimbursement of legal fees for internal investigations. The case began when GE Capital discovered that Sergio Lagos falsified numerous invoices for his company, which he used as collateral to obtain tens of millions of dollars in loans from GE Capital ...
When the Supreme Court accepted the cert petition to resolve a Circuit split regarding the False Claims Act’s statute of limitations when the government does not intervene, it created thepotential that the Court would extend the limitations periodfor private relators’ FCA actions. That is exactly what happened ...
In Lloyd v Google, the Supreme Court denied claims for mere 'loss of control' and ruled against mass class actions for data claims. Here, Philip Tansley and Matthew MacLachlan consider the court's reasoning and the broader implications for such claims. Case In its landmark judgment today, the Supreme Court unanimously held that a representative class action brought on behalf of approximately 4 ...
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that competitors may bring private suits alleging unfair competition under the Lanham Act based on misleading and deceptive food and beverage labels that are regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), overruling a Ninth Circuit decision ...
The Supreme Court recently held that a federal agency’s response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request could bar a later False Claims Act case based on the information disclosed. In Schindler Elevator Corp. v. United States ex rel. Kirk, 563 U.S. __ (2011),1 the Court held that a response to a FOIA request is a “public disclosure” in an “administrative report” under the False Claims Act ...
On Monday, March 26, 2012, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v. Simmonds. The Court held that an alleged failure by a corporate insider to file a short-swing profit disclosure under Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 does not indefinitely toll the two-year statute of limitations on another party’s claim for recovery of such profits under Section 16(b) ...
The United States Supreme Court recently held that a plaintiff need not show that a defendant willfully infringed the plaintiff's trademark as a requirement for recovering the defendant’s profits.Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil Grp., Inc., No. 18-1233, 2020 U.S. LEXIS 2408, at *12-13 (U.S. Apr. 23, 2020). Romag Fasteners, Inc. sued Fossil, Inc ...
In what it described as “an easy decision,” the U.S. Supreme Court issued its eagerly anticipated decision in RadLAX Gateway Hotel, LLC et al. v. Amalgamated Bank 1 on May 29, 2012 ...
Plaintiffs frequently bring class action claims for alleged statutory violations for which Congress has provided private rights of action and statutory damages. In many of these instances, plaintiffs do not allege any specific, tangible harm (such as monetary loss), but claim that the violation of these so-called “statutory rights” by itself constitutes injury-in-fact sufficient to satisfy standing requirements. This week, the Supreme Court held in Spokeo v ...
The United States Supreme Court yesterday significantly limited the federal government’s ability to bring an action for civil penalties more than five years after the alleged misconduct occurred. In Gabelli v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the Court held that the five-year limitations period governing most enforcement actions begins to run when the underlying violation occurred – not when the government discovered the violation ...
In an opinion issued last week, Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., 559 U.S. __ (2010), the Supreme Court held that foreign plaintiffs cannot use the U.S. Securities laws to sue foreign issuers based on foreign stock purchases: a ruling that sounds the death knell for these so-called “foreign cubed” cases. Rejecting decades of lower-court case law on the extraterritorial reach of the U.S ...
Last month, the Supreme Court decided TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, which narrowed the definition of where a corporate defendant "resides" for the purpose of suing it for patent infringement. In doing so, it overturned the 1994 holding of the Federal Circuit of what constitutes proper venue in patent infringement cases. Federal law allows a Plaintiff to bring a patent infringement suit against a defendant in any district where one of two conditions are met ...
On April 19, 2024, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its decision in Société des casinos du Québec inc. v. Association des cadres de la Société des casinos du Québec, marking the end of an almost 15 year-long debate on the freedom of association of managers and their exclusion under the Labour Code ...
On June 21, 2018, the United States Supreme Court, in South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., held that a state can now require companies not physically present in that state to collect tax on internet sales made to its residents. The explosive growth of e-commerce combined with the states’ eroding tax base convinced the Supreme Court to turn back a half century of jurisprudence ...
In a unanimous opinion issued this week, Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano, 563 U.S. __ (2011), the Supreme Court declined to adopt a proposed bright-line rule for materiality and reaffirmed the Basic “total mix” test. Specifically, the Court rejected Matrixx’s argument that adverse incident reports are never material unless they are statistically significant - overturning several lower court decisions to the contrary, including one written by then-Judge Alito ...
In a unanimous opinion issued yesterday in Erica P. John Fund, Inc. v. Halliburton Co., 563 U.S. __ (2011), a securities class fraud action, the Supreme Court held that class certification had been improperly denied by the Fifth Circuit based on the absence of “loss causation.” The Court’s holding rejected Fifth Circuit case law dating back to 2007, which had required securities fraud plaintiffs to prove loss causation in order to obtain certification of a class ...
Supreme Court Ruling Sets the Foundation for GST on Secondment of Employees AUTHOR: Reena Asthana Khair Senior Partner and Head International Trade & Indirect Taxation Kochhar & Co. EMAIL: [email protected] Japanese Multinational companies often share their talent pool across borders and jurisdictions by secondment of Japanese nationals ...
The Supreme Court in CIGNA Corp. v. Amara held that plan terms cannot be reformed under Section 502(a)(1)(B) of ERISA based on a misleading summary plan description (SPD). Despite this narrow ruling, six justices further stated that reformation may be an appropriate equitable remedy under Section 502(a)(3) of ERISA. Background In 1998, CIGNA replaced its defined benefit plan with a cash balance plan ...
Today, the Supreme Court issued decisions in the COVID mandate cases that have had employers across the country on the edge of their seats. In aper curiam6-3 decision, the Court stayed the OSHA Emergency Temporary Standard that required all employers with 100 or more employees to require COVID vaccination or weekly testing ...
On Monday, June 11, 2012, the Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari in Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds v. Amgen Inc., 660 F.3d 1170 (9th Cir. 2011) to clarify the standards for certifying a class in a securities fraud suit under the fraud-on-the-market theory. The Court’s decision to revisit class certification in securities fraud suits only a year after deciding Erica P. John Fund, Inc. v. Halliburton Co., 563 U.S ...
[!<CDATA[ This term the Supreme Court is set to resolve a circuit split over the extent of a federal district court’s power to order a person “who resides in or is found” in its district “to give testimony or statement or to produce a document or other thing for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal” pursuant to 28 U.S.C Section 1782(a) ...
In an opinion issued last week, Merck & Co. v. Reynolds, 559 U.S. __ (2010), the Supreme Court significantly curtailed the ability of defendants to assert the statute of limitations as a defense to a securities fraud claim under § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The decision makes it less likely that courts will dismiss, on statute of limitations grounds, cases filed within five years of the alleged fraud ...
A wave of settlements with municipal underwriting firms under the SEC’s Municipalities Continuing Disclosure Cooperation (MCDC) Initiative has brought renewed attention to continuing disclosure obligations in municipal offerings. But, it also raises questions about the initiative’s purportedly favorable settlement terms. On July 18, 2015, the SEC announced settlements with 36 municipal underwriters for willfully violating Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act ...
The No Surprises Act (Act), which became effective Jan. 1, 2022, is the latest health care law passed with the best of intent: to create consumer protection from unexpected out-of-network medical bills and to create a federal independent dispute resolution (IDR) process to resolve payment disputes between payers and out-of-network providers. Unfortunately, the Act, especially the U.S ...
