On November 14, 2016, in an interesting lawsuit that brings together a number of recent securities litigation trends, a noteholder of Samarco Mineração, S.A. filed a purported securities class action lawsuit in the Southern District of New York against the company and its CEO on behalf of investors who purchased the company’s debt securities. Samarco, a joint venture of mining giants Vale, S.A., and BHP Billiton, owned and operated the Fundão tailings dam that collapsed on November 5, 2015, in what has been called Brazil’s worst-ever environmental disaster. There are a number of interesting features to this new lawsuit, beyond just its relationship to the dam collapse disaster. A copy of the plaintiff’s November 14, 2016 complaint can be found here.
Continue Reading Privately-Held Brazilian Mining Company Hit with U.S. Securities Class Action
Investors File Climate Change Related Securities Suit Against Exxon Mobil
For many years, I have been raising the possibility of climate change-related corporate and securities litigation. However, despite my best prognostication, the climate change-related corporate and securities lawsuits have basically failed to materialize – that is, until now. On November 7, 2016, investors filed a purported securities class action lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas against Exxon Mobil Corporation and certain of its directors and officers. The lawsuit specifically references the company’s climate change-related disclosures, as well as the company’s valuation of its existing oil and gas reserves. One lawsuit doesn’t make a trend, and many of the lawsuit’s allegations relates specifically to Exxon Mobil and its particular disclosures. Nevertheless, the filing of the lawsuit raises the question whether there may be other climate change-related disclosure cases ahead. A copy of the November 7, 2016 lawsuit can be found here.
Continue Reading Investors File Climate Change Related Securities Suit Against Exxon Mobil
Generic Drug Companies Hit With Antitrust Enforcement Follow-On Securities Suits
In a recent post, I noted that plaintiffs’ lawyers had recently launched a series of securities class action lawsuits against several poultry producers in the wake of news that companies in that industry were the target of antitrust enforcement action. Now news has emerged that antitrust regulators may be targeting companies in a different sector, the generic drug manufacturing industry. Within days of the news, plaintiffs’ lawyers have filed several securities class action lawsuits against several generic drug companies — the latest companies to be hit with follow-on securities suits following news of antitrust enforcement actions.
Continue Reading Generic Drug Companies Hit With Antitrust Enforcement Follow-On Securities Suits
Poultry Producers Hit with Antitrust Suits, Follow-on Securities Litigation
One of the characteristic securities litigation patterns for many years has been that lawsuit filings tend to come in distinctive waves, in which specific sectors get hit with a series of securities suits or companies engaging in certain types of conduct or business practices attract securities litigation. The lawsuits arising out of the dot-com crash and the options backdating scandal are examples of these kinds of litigation patterns. Over the last several weeks, a different industry sector pattern has emerged. The poultry production industry, which recently has been the target of private antitrust litigation, has now been hit with a string of follow-on securities class action lawsuits as well. These lawsuits represent one of the more distinctive securities litigation filing patterns this year.
Continue Reading Poultry Producers Hit with Antitrust Suits, Follow-on Securities Litigation
Hedge Fund Investor Launches Fraud Lawsuit Against Theranos
Earlier this year, the SEC announced a “Silicon Valley Initiative,” reflecting the agency’s concerns about private and pre-IPO companies that were scoring sky-high valuations in private offerings. The agency said that it is particularly focused on so-called “unicorns” – that is, private companies with valuations greater than $1 billion. Although the agency did not name any of the specific companies in which it was interested, it soon became clear that one of the companies the agency was investigating was Theranos, the start-up company whose blood-testing technology and practices have recently gained media and regulatory scrutiny. The SEC’s scrutiny of a private company’s fund-raising practices was itself noteworthy; now, in yet another notable development, the privately-held company has drawn an investor lawsuit alleging securities fraud.
Continue Reading Hedge Fund Investor Launches Fraud Lawsuit Against Theranos
Guest Post: ERISA-Regulated Benefit Plans Not “Affiliates” for Securities Class Settlement Purposes
In the settlement documents prepared in connection with securities class action settlements, the documents typically specify that certain groups are excluded from the settlement class. Among the groups typically excluded are “affiliates” of the class action defendant company. In a recent decision (here), the Second Circuit examined the question whether an ERISA-regulated benefit plan that the defendant company sponsors is an “affiliate” of the company and therefore precluded from sharing in the settlement proceeds. In the following guest post, members of the Paul Weiss law firm take a look at the Second Circuit’s decision and discuss its implications. I would like to thank the Paul Weiss attorneys for their willingness to publish their article on my site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible parties on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if would like to submit a guest post. Here is the Paul Weiss attorney’s guest post.
Continue Reading Guest Post: ERISA-Regulated Benefit Plans Not “Affiliates” for Securities Class Settlement Purposes
Guest Post: Upcoming Appellate Decisions: Rebutting the Basic Presumption of Reliance
In its 2014 decision in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed the presumption of reliance under the fraud on the market theory. The Court also held that at defendant may rebut the presumption of reliance by showing that the alleged misrepresentation at issue did not affect the defendant company’s share price. In the following guest post, David Topol and Jennifer Williams of the Wiley Rein law firm take a look at the way that the lower courts have applied the Court’s holding in the 2014 decision, and review some pending cases that could have important implications for this way that the decision is applied in the lower courts. I would like to thank David and Jen for their willingness to publish their article 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 David and Jen’s guest post.
Continue Reading Guest Post: Upcoming Appellate Decisions: Rebutting the Basic Presumption of Reliance
Seventh Circuit, Citing Delaware Precedent with Approval, Overturns Deal Lawsuit Disclosure-Only Settlement
Cornerstone Research’s recent report on merger objection lawsuit filings showed what many of us expected to see – that in the wake of Delaware Chancellor Andre Bouchard’s rejection of the disclosure only settlement in the litigation arising out of Zillow’s acquisition of Trulia, there would be a decline in the number of merger objection lawsuits filed. The report also showed that the filing decline was particularly steep in Delaware, but not as sharp elsewhere. In other words, the plaintiffs’ lawyers still active in pursuing this type of litigation increasingly are filing their merger objection lawsuits outside of Delaware. With these kinds of cases now relatively more likely to be heard outside Delaware, the question of whether or not judges in other jurisdictions will follow the lead of Delaware’s courts in rejecting disclosure only settlements takes on relatively greater importance.
Continue Reading Seventh Circuit, Citing Delaware Precedent with Approval, Overturns Deal Lawsuit Disclosure-Only Settlement
Yet Another Brazilian Company Hit with U.S. Securities Suit
As I have noted in prior posts (most recently here), in recent months a number of Brazilian companies have been hit with a wave of U.S. securities class action lawsuits. These suits have followed in the wake of corruption scandals and environmental disasters in Brazil. Now yet another Brazilian company has been hit with a U.S. securities class action lawsuit, as aircraft manufacturer Embraer and certain of its directors and officers has been sued in a securities suit following allegations that of the company’s involvement in the payment of bribes to government officials in the Dominican Republic. In addition to being the most recent securities lawsuit filed in the U.S. against a Brazilian company, the new lawsuit also represents the latest example of a securities suit arising in the wake of a bribery investigation.
Continue Reading Yet Another Brazilian Company Hit with U.S. Securities Suit
Guest Post: Second Circuit Expands the IndyMac Rule
One of the important and recurring issues under the federal securities laws is the question of whether or not American Pipe tolling applies to the statute of repose in the securities laws’ liability provisions. Specifically, the question is whether or not the three-year limitations period in Section 13 of the ’33 Act may be tolled (under a legal theory known as the American Pipe tolling doctrine) by the filing of a putative securities class action, or rather that the three-year provision cannot be tolled. As discussed here, the U.S. Supreme Court recently dismissed the cert petition in the Indy Mac case, leaving standing a Second Circuit ruling in that case that the filing of a securities class action lawsuit does not toll the ’33 Act’s statute of repose.
In the following guest post, the attorneys from the Paul Weiss law firm take a look at two recent Second Circuit decisions that raised these questions of tolling under the ’33 Act’s statute of repose. As discussed below, the authors conclude that the Second Circuit’s most recent decisions suggest that statutes of repose generally—and not simply statutes of repose established under the federal securities laws—are immune to tolling.
I would like to thank the attorneys at the Paul Weiss firm for allowing me to publish their 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 Paul Weiss attorneys’ guest post.
Continue Reading Guest Post: Second Circuit Expands the IndyMac Rule