Photo of Kevin LaCroix

Kevin M. LaCroix is an attorney and Executive Vice President, RT ProExec, a division of RT Specialty. RT ProExec is an insurance intermediary focused exclusively on management liability issues.

Francis Kean

In the following guest post, Francis Kean examines the proposed new U.K. National Security and Investment Bill, which creates a new enforcement regime and carries substantial new risks for fines and even imprisonment. Francis is a Partner, Financial Lines, at McGill and Partners. A version of this article previously was published as a McGill client alert. I would like to thank Francis for allowing me to publish his 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 Francis’s article.
Continue Reading Guest Post: New Source of Potential Fines, Penalties and Imprisonment for Directors

The massive U.K. collective lawsuit against Mastercard will return to the Competition Appeal Tribunal for further proceedings as a result of the December 11, 2020 Judgement of the U.K. Supreme Court. The high-profile lawsuit is the first under the U.K.’s recently adopted opt-out collective action procedures for consumer protection claims. The case is also the first collective action proceeding to reach the U.K Supreme Court. The Court’s judgment sets out important guidelines and principles for collective action proceedings. The Court’s December 11, 2020 Judgment can be found here. A written summary of the Court’s Judgment can be found here, and a video summary of the Judgment delivered by Lord Michael Briggs can be found here.
Continue Reading U.K. Supreme Court Ruling Clears Way for Massive Opt-Out Collective Action Proceeding Against Mastercard

In the same December 11, 2020 Order in which it rejected the bid by the Texas Attorney General to overturn the results of the 2020 Presidential election, the U.S. Supreme Court also agreed to take up a case involving the effort of Goldman Sachs to overturn the certification of a class in the long-running securities lawsuit. The case relates to the bank’s alleged conflicts of interest in structuring collateralized debt obligation securities before the global financial crisis. The case will require the Court to address important questions pertaining to the ability of securities lawsuit defendants opposing class certification to attempt to rebut the presumption of reliance and the extent to which the defendants in opposing class certification can rely on matter that is also relevant to merits-related issues such as materiality.
Continue Reading U.S. Supreme Court Agrees to Take Up Securities Suit Class Certification Issues

A third California state court has ruled that a provision specifying that federal courts are the exclusive forum for the resolution of ‘33 act liability actions is valid and enforceable. This latest decision — in a state court securities class action lawsuit pending against Dropbox — suggests that a broad consensus is emerging in California court to enforce federal forum provisions. But while the Dropbox decision is largely consistent with the prior California state court decisions enforcing FFP, there are certain features of the Dropbox decision that make it noteworthy and interesting in its own right. A copy of the December 4, 2020 decision in the Dropbox case can be found here. A December 8, 2020 memo from the Seyfarth Shaw law firm about the ruling can be found here.
Continue Reading Third California State Court Upholds Enforceability of Federal Forum Provision

Jeffrey Lubitz
Elisa Mendoza

One of the most distinctive and interesting securities class action litigation phenomena in recent years has been the rise of event driven litigation. In the following guest post, Jeffrey Lubitz, Executive Director at ISS Securities Class Action Services, and Elisa Mendoza, Vice President of Operations at ISS Securities Class Action Services, take a detailed look at the event driven securities litigation phenomenon, which they describe as a new driver in the growth of securities suit filings. A complete version of this ISS SCAS white paper with footnotes, endnotes, and sources is available  on the ISS website. I would like to thank Jeff and Elisa 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 l like to submit a guest post. Here is Jeff and Elisa’s article.
Continue Reading Guest Post: Event Driven Securities Litigation: The New Driver in Class Action Growth

Paul Ferrillo

In the following guest, Paul Ferrillo takes a look at the current deteriorating cyber insurance claims environment and offers his views on the likely impact of the claims developments on the market for cyber insurance in 2021. Paul is a partner in the McDermott, Will & Emery law firm. My thanks to Paul for allowing me to publish his article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest posts 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 Paul’s article.
Continue Reading Guest Post: Be Prepared: Costly Cyber Claims Could Lead to Higher Premiums in 2021

recent guest post on this site opined 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 New York appellate court ruling reversing a trial court’s dismissal motion denial in a state court Section 11 action could be significant. According to a December 4, 2020 Law360 article (here), the ruling represents the first time the New York appellate division has addressed the merits of a federal ’33 Act claim since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Cyan. The New York appellate court’s December 3, 2020 ruling can be found here.
Continue Reading NY Appellate Court Reverses Trial Court’s Dismissal Denial in State Court Securities Suit

On December 4, 2020, in what is according to the SEC its first proceeding charging an issuer for misleading investors about the financial effects of the pandemic on company finances and operations, the SEC entered into a settled Cease and Desist Order with The Cheesecake Factory Incorporated based on the agency’s determinations that the company’s late March and early April statements that it was “operating sustainably” were, without further information, misleading to investors.  The SEC’s December 4, 2020 Cease-and-Desist Order can be found  here, and the agency’s December 4, 2020 press release about the Order can be found here.
Continue Reading SEC Charges Cheesecake Factory Over Misleading COVID-Related Disclosures

Nessim Mezrahi

In the following guest post, Nessim Mezrahi takes a look at the Second Circuit’s November 25, 2020 Summary Order in Lea v. TAL Education Group, in which the appellate court reversed the trial court’s dismissal of a securities class action complaint. Many of the plaintiff’s allegations in the complaint were based on matters first raised in a short seller report, a consideration about which Mezrahi has concerns, as discussed below. Mezrahi is co-founder and CEO of SAR, a securities class action data analytics and software company. I would like to thank Nessim for allowing me to publish his article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this site’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Nessim’s article.
Continue Reading Guest Post: Second Circuit Ruling Exposes D&Os to Exchange Act Claims Based on Biased Short-Seller Research

In the latest development in what has become a widespread push toward greater board diversity, Nasdaq has filed a proposal with the SEC that would require Nasdaq-listed companies to disclose whether the companies meet Nasdaq-specified board diversity requirements. If approved, the new listing rules would require companies to have at least one female director and one director who is a racial minority or who self-identifies as LGBTQ+, or to provide an explanation why they do not. A copy of Nasdaq’s December 1, 2020 proposal can be found here. Nasdaq’s December 1, 2020 press release concerning the proposal can be found here.
Continue Reading Nasdaq Pushes Proposed Board Diversity Listing Rules