PrintEven though (as have been well-documented by other observers) securities class action litigation filings increased in 2013, overall corporate and securities litigation filings during 2013 declined for the second year in a row, according to a February 4, 2014 report from the insurance information firm, Advisen. Though the corporate and securities filing activity in

Considered on an absolute basis, securities class action lawsuit filings were up about nine percent in 2013 compared to 2012, although the number of 2013 lawsuits was about 13 percent below annual filings averages for the years 1996-2012, according to a new report from Cornerstone Research and the Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse.

In my year-end survey of corporate and securities litigation, one of the trends I noted regarding the litigation that had been filed in 2013 was the rise in lawsuit filings following in the wake of governmental investigations and regulatory actions, particularly with respect to investigations and regulatory actions outside the United States. If two

Securities class action lawsuit filings “saw a small increase” during 2013, while securities class action settlements reflected a dynamic in which “large settlements got larger and smaller settlements got smaller” during the year, according to the annual report from NERA Economic Consulting. The January 21, 2014 report, entitled “Recent Trends in Securities Class Action Litigation:

As noted in a recent guest post on this site (here), the SEC recently announced the so-called “Robocop” initiative to try to detect improper or fraudulent financial reporting. However, as the authors of the prior post explain in a second guest post below, the Robocop initiative is one of two efforts the agency

One of the most distinctive corporate and securities litigation trend in recent years has been the surge in M&A-related litigation, with virtually every deal attracting at least one lawsuit. This trend continued again in 2013, according to a recently updated study from Notre Dame business professor Matthew Cain and Ohio State law professor Steven Davidoff.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to revisit the “fraud on the market” theory by granting cert in the Halliburton case a few weeks ago, many commentators (including this blog) have considered whether the Court might wind up taking an intermediate position that addresses criticisms of the theory while preserving securities plaintiffs’ ability to