Securities Litigation

Subscribe to Securities Litigation via RSS

As I have noted in a number of posts (most recently here), the size of securities class action settlements rose significantly in 2018 compared to recent years. But what do the 2018 securities class action settlements look like when broken down according to the lead plaintiffs’ firm involved in the settlement? That is the question answered in a recent report from ISS Securities Class Action Services. The April 3, 2019 report, entitled “The Top 50 of 2018” takes a look at the top 50 plaintiffs’ firms ranked by aggregate size and number of settlements can be found here.  
Continue Reading Plaintiffs’ Firms Ranked by Total 2018 Securities Suit Settlement Size and Number

Aggregate, average, and median securities class action lawsuit settlement amounts all rose in 2018, according to the latest report from Cornerstone Research. The 2018 total settlement amount of just over $5 billion dollars is substantially higher than the prior year total and in fact is the third-highest total in the past 10 years. The $5 billion total was driven by a small number of very large settlements. The Cornerstone Research report, which is entitled “Securities Class Action Settlements: 2018 Review and Analysis” can be found here. Cornerstone Research’s March 26, 2019 press release regarding the report can be found here.
Continue Reading Cornerstone Research: Securities Suit Settlement Size Increased in 2018

For many years, U.S.-listed companies based outside the U.S. have enjoyed a relatively advantageous pricing environment for their D&O insurance. Because many D&O insurance underwriters based outside the U.S. used a different pricing model than their U.S. counterparts, pricing for these foreign filers was in many instances lower than the pricing available to equivalent U.S.-based companies. In recent months, however, as a result of surging claims frequency and loss costs, foreign filers’ D&O insurance costs have jumped significantly. These developments and the claims-related factors causing the changes are detailed in an interesting March 20, 2019 article by Jane Njavro of Woodruff Sawyer entitled “Why D&O Costs Are Soaring for Foreign Filers” (here). The article includes detailed statistical analysis of the relevant U.S. securities class action litigation trends.
Continue Reading The Deteriorating D&O Insurance Environment for Foreign U.S.-Listed Companies

Stanford Law School

On Tuesday, March 5, 2019, it was my distinct honor and pleasure to be one of the invited speakers at Professor Joseph Grundfest’s corporate and securities litigation class at Stanford Law School in Palo Alto, California. Along with Priya Cherian Huskins of the Woodruff Sawyer firm, I was invited to address the students on the topic of the role of D&O insurance in securities and derivative litigation.
Continue Reading Corporate and Securities Litigation at Stanford Law School

When Congress enacted the PSLRA in 1995, one of the goals was to try to deter frivolous litigation. As time has passed, it has also become clear that many of the PSLRA’s procedural reforms also created a structure of incentives for plaintiffs’ lawyers. For example, the PSLRA’s most adequate plaintiff requirement created an incentive for plaintiffs’ lawyers to seek to represent institutional investors. However, according to a recent academic study, with the passage of time, some of the incentives have had a distorted impact, as the incentives motivate plaintiffs’ lawyers to try to get hold of a mega-case “lottery ticket” that will produce a jackpot outcome – for the lawyers. These distortions in turn are creating many of the ills we are now seeing the securities class action litigation arena, justifying, according to the academic authors, another round of securities litigation reform.
Continue Reading Securities Litigation Reform: Addressing the Class Action Lottery

Because the lawsuits are so expensive to litigate and to resolve, securities class action litigation has long been the subject of both scrutiny and criticism. However, while the history of concern about securities litigation is long, the case can be made that there has rarely been a time when securities litigation in the U.S. deserves a critical look more than it does now. As has been well-documented on this site and elsewhere, securities class action lawsuit filing activity has been a record levels for the past two years. Signs are so far this year that these heightened levels of activity, which can only be described as alarming, are continuing. Given these circumstances, it is hardly surprising that business groups and others are now raising calls for another round of securities class action litigation reform.
Continue Reading Securities Class Action Reform Discussed at Washington Event

Last fall, the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform issued a paper detailing the ways in which the U.S. securities class action litigation system is “spinning out of control,” and calling for a renewed wave of securities litigation reform. In a new paper, entitled “Containing the Contagion: Proposals to Reform the Broken Securities Class Action System,” the Institute renews the call for reform and sets out a series of specific proposals intended address the “abuses” the paper identifies. The current securities class action litigation system, according to the paper, is “plainly broken, harming investors and our capital markets.” The Institute’s February 25, 2019 paper can be found here.
Continue Reading U.S. Securities Class Action Litigation: Alarm Bells and Reform Proposals

As was the case in 2017, there were relatively few larger securities class action lawsuit settlements during 2018, compared to prior years. As reported in latest large securities class action lawsuit settlement report from ISS Securities Class Action Services (ISS), there were only four settlements in 2018 that were large enough to make the list of all time large settlements; while the four settlements making the top 100 list is above the only two cases that made the list in 2017, the 2018 total was still below most years’ totals since 2008. The ISS report, entitled “The Top 100 U.S. Class Action Settlements of All Time (as of December 31, 2017)” can be found here.
Continue Reading ISS Releases 2018 Top 100 U.S. Securities Suit Settlements List

As I have previously noted, 2018 was another extraordinary year for U.S. securities class action litigation, as filings overall remained at near-historical rates. One of the significant contribution factors to this development was the substantial number of securities suits filed against life sciences companies. The number and significance of the securities suits filed against life sciences companies is detailed in a February  6, 2019 report from the Dechert law firm entitled “Dechert Survey: Developments in U.S. Securities Fraud Class Actions Against Life Sciences Companies: 2018 Edition” (here).
Continue Reading A Detailed Look at 2018 Securities Litigation Against Life Sciences Companies

It is extremely rare for securities class action lawsuits to go all the way through to a jury verdict. Since 1996, there have been more than 5,200 securities class action lawsuits filed, but, as detailed further below, fewer than 25 cases during that time have gone to trial. However, on February 4, 2019, a jury in the Central District of California entered a verdict in the securities class action lawsuit pending against Puma Biotechnology and certain of its directors and officers. While the jury found that the plaintiffs had not proven that three of the four allegedly misleading statements at issue were “false and misleading,” the jury found against the defendants and for the plaintiff as to a fourth statement. The jury specified damages of $4.50 a share with respect to the one misleading statement, which, according to the plaintiff’s counsel’s press release, amounts to a damages award of “up to $100 million,” although the actual damages amount remains to be calculated based on trading during the class period. 
Continue Reading Rare Securities Class Action Lawsuit Trial Results in Partial Verdict for Plaintiffs