The number of federal court securities class action lawsuit filings remained “near record levels” during 2018, according to the latest report published by  Cornerstone Research in conjunction with the Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse. State court securities lawsuit filings, detailed in the report, drove securities class action litigation filing activity to even higher levels during 2018, arguably to the highest levels ever. According to the report, the likelihood of a U.S.-listed company getting hit with a securities suit was higher in 2018 than it has ever been. Driven by the sheer volume of litigation and the number of lawsuits against larger companies, the 2018 securities suit filings represented an aggregate market capitalization loss of over $1 trillion. The Cornerstone Research report, entitled “Securities Class Action Filings: 2018 Year in Review,” can be found here. Cornerstone Research’s January 30, 2019 press release can be found here. My own review of the 2018 securities class action lawsuit filings can be found here.
Continue Reading Cornerstone Research: Combined Federal and State Securities Suit Filings at Highest-Ever Levels in 2018

During 2017 and 2018, plaintiffs’ lawyers filed a number of securities class action lawsuits against companies that had experienced data breaches. Among the highest profile of these cases was the securities lawsuit filed in 2017 against the credit rating firm, Equifax, which in September 2017 announced that hackers had breached its consumer database and accessed millions of records containing personally identifiable information. On January 28, 2019, in a ruling that will be closely analyzed in connection with the several other recently filed data breach-related securities lawsuits, Northern District of Georgia Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. entered an order granting in part and denying in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss. A copy of the January 28 order can be found here.
Continue Reading Equifax Data Breach-Related Securities Suit Dismissal Motion Denied in Part, Granted in Part

The pace of federal court securities class action filings during 2018 was “the highest since the aftermath of the 2000 dot-com crash,” according to a recent report from NERA Economic Consulting. Not only were the filings during the year at significantly elevated levels, but the filings “accelerated over the second half of the year, with the fourth quarter being one of the busiest on record.” As noteworthy as the filing trends are, the elevated filing pace “masked fundamental changes in the filing characteristics,” including the shift toward significantly higher amounts of investor losses. Average and median settlement levels also jumped significantly during the year, compared to the year prior. The January 29, 2019 report, entitled “Recent Trends in Securities Class Action Litigation: 2018 Full-Year Review” can be found here. NERA Economic Consulting’s January 29, 2019 press release about the report can be found here. My analysis of the 2018 federal court securities class action lawsuit filings can be found here.
Continue Reading NERA Economic Consulting: Securities Suit Filings at Highest Level in Years

A big factor in the heightened levels of securities litigation filings in 2018 and one of the most important recent litigation trends has been the rise of event-driven securities litigation. These are securities lawsuits based not – as was the case in the past – on accounting misstatements or financial misrepresentations, but on setbacks in a company’s operations that affect a company’s share price. In recent months, securities suits have been filed following wildfires, plane crashes and data breaches. Given this trend and in light of the significance of the event, it arguably should be no surprise that plaintiff lawyers have now filed a U.S. securities class action lawsuit after the most recent Brazilian dam collapse, the January 25, 2019 disaster at Brumadinho, in Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Continue Reading Latest Brazilian Dam Disaster Leads to Event-Driven Securities Suit

On January 4, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court granted cert in a case that will determine what a plaintiff must plead in order to state a claim for false statements or omissions in connection with a tender offer under Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Ninth Circuit held in the case at issue that a plaintiff needs only plead negligence, differing on the issue from at least five different federal circuit courts that had previously held that in order to establish a claim a plaintiff must plead that the defendants acted with scienter. The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the case could have a significant impact on merger objection lawsuits filed in connection with tender offers. The Supreme Court’s January 4, 2019 order in Emulex Corporation v. Varjabedien can be found here.
Continue Reading Supreme Court to Consider Whether Negligence Sufficient to State Section 14(e) Tender Offer Claims

The heightened pace of securities class action lawsuit filings continued in 2018, as filing levels remained well above historical patterns, even though the total number of suits dipped very slightly compared to 2017. The total number of filings during 2018 was significantly inflated by the number of federal court merger objection lawsuit filings during the year. However, even disregarding the M&A-related lawsuits, the number of traditional lawsuit filings during 2018 was well above long-term averages. Even more significantly, the litigation rate (that is, the number of suits relative to the number of listed companies) arguably was at all-time record high levels in 2018 compared to prior years, as discussed further below.
Continue Reading Securities Suit Filings Continued at Heightened Pace in 2018

One idea circulating since the U.S. Supreme Court held in Cyan that state court Section 11 actions are not removable to federal court is that companies could avoid state court actions by adopting a federal forum bylaw or charter provision. Indeed, a number of companies recently have adopted these provisions prior to going public. Late last year, a shareholder of several IPO companies filed an action in Delaware Chancery Court seeking a judicial declaration that the companies’ Federal Forum Provisions are invalid. On December 19, 2018, Vice Chancellor Travis Laster issued a memorandum opinion agreeing with the plaintiff and holding that under Delaware law, Federal Forum Provisions are invalid and ineffective. A copy of Laster’s opinion can be found here.
Continue Reading Delaware Court Holds Charter Provision Designating a Federal Forum for Section 11 Claims is Invalid

As I have noted in several recent posts, plaintiffs’ lawyers seem to have a renewed interest in trying to pursue securities class action lawsuits against companies that have experienced a data breach. Just to cite one recent example, as discussed here, within a day of Marriott’s recent high-profile announcement of a data breach involving its Starwood unit’s customer database, plaintiffs’ lawyers filed a securities class action lawsuit against the company. While plaintiffs’ lawyers may be drawn to these data breach cases, the cases may or may not prove to be successful for them. For example, in a recent ruling in the data breach-related securities class action lawsuit filed against PayPal late last year, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The ruling highlights many of the problems plaintiffs’ lawyers will have in trying to pursue these kinds of cases. Northern District of California Judge Edward Chen’s December 13, 2018 ruling in the case can be found here.
Continue Reading Dismissal Motion Granted in PayPal Data Breach-Related Securities Suit

In several recent conversations, I have been asked whether I thought that the whole #MeToo movement might have more or less played out, and that we might not be seeing as many, or even any, more D&O claims based on underlying allegations of sexual misconduct. In response, I said that I didn’t think the phenomenon had played out but I did suggest that I thought that the phenomenon might be shifting and that the kinds of underlying allegations would change. Although it does not represent exactly the kind of thing I had in mind, a new securities class action lawsuit filed against Teladoc Health and based on alleged misconduct of one of its senior executives does at least represent a variant on the kinds of D&O claims following in the wake of allegations of sexual misconduct.
Continue Reading Securities Lawsuit Filed Based on Reports of Alleged Inappropriate Office Relationship

The high-profile November 18, 2018 arrest in Japan of Carlos Ghosn, the Chairman and former CEO of Nissan (and of several other car companies) on charges of misleading the Japanese government and investors about his compensation made the front pages of the world’s papers. Continuing revelations, including the recent indictment of Ghosn and other company executive, continue to roil the company. On December 11, 2018, an institutional investor and holder of U.S.-traded Nissan ADR’s initiated a securities class action lawsuit against the company. The lawsuit is interesting in and of itself but also with respect to how it reflects several recent securities litigation filing trends.
Continue Reading Nissan Chairman’s Arrest and Pay Disclosure Leads to U.S. Securities Suit