On May 27, 2020, in the latest #MeToo-related securities class action lawsuit to fail to survive initial pleading hurdles, Judge Gloria M. Navarro granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the securities suit filed against Wynn Resorts based on allegations that the company had failed to disclose sexual misconduct of its former CEO, Stephen Wynn. The ruling joins several other recent dismissal rulings in #MeToo-related securities suits – although, as noted below, there have also been several noteworthy settlements in #MeToo suits as well. A copy of Judge Navarro’s opinion can be found here.
Continue Reading Dismissal Motion Granted in Wynn Resorts #MeToo-Related Securities Suit

As I have documented in prior posts (for example, here), publicly traded life sciences companies are frequent targets of securities class action lawsuits. But life sciences companies’ securities litigation exposure may be well-known, it is not always as appreciated that the securities suits against life sciences companies are often dismissed. Two recent rulings in securities suits against life sciences companies – Antares Pharma and Nabriva Therapeutics – provide recent examples of securities suits in which the courts have granted the companies’ dismissal motions. The rulings illustrate the extent to which life sciences companies often are able to successfully defend themselves against securities suits.
Continue Reading Life Sciences Companies: Frequent Securities Suits Frequently Dismissed

A recent guest post on this site expressed the view that because of the volume of Section 11 litigation being filed in New York state court, New York’s courts “will have a major role in shaping the standards applied in Securities Act litigation going forward.” If that is the case, then the recent ruling by a New York trial court judge granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss in a state court Section 11 action could be significant. New York (New York County) Supreme Court Judge Barry Ostrager’s May 15, 2020 ruling in the consolidated Sundial Growers Securities Litigation can be found here.
Continue Reading Dismissal Granted in New York State Court Securities Class Action

In March 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Cyan that state courts retain concurrent jurisdiction for liability actions under the Securities Act of 1933. As a result, defendants could face the prospect of parallel litigation in both federal and state court, with no means of consolidating the proceedings. In the following guest post, Bruce G. Vanyo, Richard H. Zelichov, Michael J. Lohnes, and Jonathan Rotenberg, all of the Katten law firm, take a look at Cyan’s impact and review some recent positive developments that address some of the concerns Cyan has led to. I would like to thank the authors for allowing me to publish their article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is the authors’ article.
Continue Reading Guest Post: Section 11 Cases in State Court Post-Cyan – Is the Tide Turning?

Companies navigating the current heath crisis and dealing with its financial effects face a number of risks. Among the many risks is the possibility of business litigation. For publicly traded companies, the litigation risks include the possibility of securities class action litigation. Even in the midst of a pandemic, the steps companies can take to try to mitigate their securities class action litigation remain the same – manage disclosures, control insider trading, and handle bad news appropriately, among other things – but the coronavirus outbreak has added new dimensions to these steps. Well-advised companies will be making the appropriate adjustments, and, as discussed below, D&O insurance underwriters will be (or perhaps, should be) monitoring companies closely to see which companies are making the adjustments.
Continue Reading Securities Litigation Loss Prevention in the Midst of a Pandemic

Tim Hoeffner
Paul Ferrillo

In the following guest post, Tim Hoeffner and Paul Ferrillo of the McDermott Will & Emery law firm take a look at Southern District of New York Judge Ronnie Abrams’s April 2, 2020 order granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss in the Adient PLC Securities Litigation. I would like to thank Tim and Paul for allowing me the opportunity to publish their article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Tim and Paul’s article.
Continue Reading Guest Post: Scienter “Takes a Seat” Front Row Center in New SDNY Case

Tim Hoeffner
Paul Ferrillo

In the following guest post, Tim Hoeffner and Paul Ferrillo of the McDermott Will & Emery law firm take a look at the Eighth Circuit’s April 10, 2020 decision in the Target Corporation securities class action lawsuit, in which the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the case. I would like to thank Tim and Paul for allowing me the opportunity to publish their article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Tim and Paul’s article.
Continue Reading Guest Post: Eighth Circuit on Target on Appeal

As I have detailed in prior post on this site (most recently here), in recent months plaintiffs’ lawyers have filed a number of securities class action lawsuits against companies in cannabis-related businesses. According to an April 22, 20202 report from the Goodwin Procter law firm entitled “Update on Securities Litigation Against Cannabis Companies” (here), the number of securities suits against cannabis companies jumped significantly in 2019 compared to 2018. As discussed further below, these litigation trends have continued in 2020.
Continue Reading A Closer Look at Securities Suits Against Cannabis Companies

In a now infamous August 7, 2018 post on his Twitter account, Tesla CEO Elon Musk stated that he was “considering taking Tesla private at $420. Funding secured.” This post and several subsequent messages ultimately were the subject of an SEC enforcement proceeding (later settled) as well as several securities class action lawsuits (later consolidated). On April 15, 2020, Northern District of California Edward Chen denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the consolidated securities lawsuit, finding that the “take private” Tweet and other messages were false and misleading. Judge Chen’s opinion is of interest because of the high-profile nature of the allegations, but also for what it says about corporate securities liability exposure for executives’ social media statements. Judge Chen’s opinion can be found here.
Continue Reading Musk’s “Take Private” Tweets Held Actionable

Tim Hoeffner
Paul Ferrillo

The Second Circuit issued its latest decision in the long running Goldman Sachs Group securities class action litigation on April 7, 2020 (here). In the following guest post, Tim Hoeffner and Paul Ferrillo of the McDermott, Will & Emery law firm take a look at the Second Circuit’s decision and analyze its implications. I would like to thank Tim and Paul for allowing me to publish their article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Time and Paul’s article.
Continue Reading Guest Post: Close Call in New Second Circuit Class Certification Decision