Businesses these days face a wide variety of headwinds – rising interest rates, economic inflation, supply chain and labor supply disruptions, war in Ukraine, even continued disruptions from COVID – that are interfering with business operations and affecting financial performance. In some instances, these macroeconomic factors are translating into securities litigation. In the latest example of this phenomenon, a plaintiff shareholder has sued video display systems company Daktronics following the company’s announcement that supply chain disruptions, labor shortages, and shutdowns in China caused a decline in the company’s sales, which led to a later announcement of a “substantial doubt” of the company’s ability to continue as a going concern. The December 21, 2022, complaint can be found here. Continue Reading Video Display Company Hit with Supply Chain-Related Securities Suit
Construction Financing Platform Hit with SPAC-Related Securities Suit
In a few days, when I work up my summary of the year’s events in the world of D&O, one of the stories I will be covering will be the volume of SPAC-related securities litigation during the year. The SPAC-related litigation represents a significant part of the year’s securities class action lawsuit filings. The latest example of this phenomenon is the lawsuit filed late last week against residential home improvement financing platform Sunlight Financial Holdings, Inc., which became a public company through a July 2021 merger with a SPAC. The new lawsuit is in many ways representative of the kinds of SPAC-related lawsuits filed this year. A copy of the complaint in the new lawsuit can be found here. Continue Reading Construction Financing Platform Hit with SPAC-Related Securities Suit
Dismissal Motion Ruling Patterns Emerge in COVID-19-Related Securities Suits
Since the initial coronavirus outbreak in the U.S. in March 2020, plaintiffs’ lawyers have filed a host of securities class action lawsuits against companies raising a variety of COVID-19-related allegations. Many of these cases have faced significant hurdles at the initial pleading stage, and in a number of cases the dismissal motions have been granted. The one categorical exception to these dismissal motion generalizations seems to be cases involving vaccine development companies. Two rulings in the past week seem to corroborate both of these observations. First, in a December 9, 2022 ruling in the securities suit pending against the diagnostic testing company Talis Biomedical, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss (albeit with leave to amend). However, in a December 12, 2022 ruling in the securities case against the vaccine development company Novavax, the court denied the defendants’ dismissal motion in significant part. The rulings in these two cases are discussed below. Continue Reading Dismissal Motion Ruling Patterns Emerge in COVID-19-Related Securities Suits
Supreme Court Agrees to Take Up Question of ’33 Act Standing in Slack Direct Listing Case
On December 13, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the petition of Slack Technologies to have the court take up the question of the plaintiff’s standing to pursue ’33 Act liability claims against the company. The standing question arises because the plaintiff bought his Slack shares in connection with the June 2019 transaction in which Slack went public through a direct listing rather than through a traditional IPO. Though the standing questions arises in the relatively narrow context of the company’s direct listing, the standing questions at issue potentially could affect ’33 Act liability claims in other contexts as well. A copy of the U.S. Supreme Court’s December 13, 2022 order in the Slack case can be found here. Continue Reading Supreme Court Agrees to Take Up Question of ’33 Act Standing in Slack Direct Listing Case
D&O Risks Relating to Trade Sanctions, Money Laundering, and Export Rules
As a result of a host of recent developments – including the War in Ukraine, trade tensions with China, and growing issues involving digital assets – several long-standing regulatory regimes have become increasingly important for companies and their executives. These regulatory regimes include U.S. sanctions, export controls, anti-money laundering (AML) and anti-bribery and corruption laws. According to a recent memo from the Skadden law firm entitled “Why Directors and Executives Need to Pay Attention to Sanctions, Money Laundering, and Export Rules” (here), boards and senior management need to be especially vigilant with respect to these laws as the company officials can become targets of enforcement actions – indeed, directors and officer have been named personally in both civil and criminal enforcement actions involving these laws and regulations. Continue Reading D&O Risks Relating to Trade Sanctions, Money Laundering, and Export Rules
Lessons from Climate Change-Related Litigation in Europe
In recent posts on this site (for example, here), I have discussed the developing ESG-related litigation phenomenon in which claimants file suits not against ESG laggards bur rather against companies that have taken the initiative on ESG-related matters. However, the existence of this trend, while noteworthy, does not negate the possibilities for litigation involving the ESG laggards, as well. There are in fact noteworthy instances of this latter type of litigation, much of it in Europe, as is well-detailed in a December 2022 white paper from the Jones Day law firm entitled “ESG – Climate Change and Related Litigation Takes Center State in Europe” (here). The white paper not only catalogs recent European ESG-related litigation but also identifies regulatory developments and other trends that could contribute to further litigation in the future. Continue Reading Lessons from Climate Change-Related Litigation in Europe
Guest Post: Allegations of Bribery to FIFA Officials Results in $95 Million Settlement


As I have previously noted on this site, bribery-related allegations often lead to follow-on securities lawsuits, some of which have resulted in significant settlements. In the following guest post, Jeff Lubitz, Managing Director, ISS Securities Class Action Services, and Jarett Sena, Director of Litigation Analysis, ISS Securities Class Action Services, take a detailed look at a recent significant settlement in a bribery-related securities suit involving Groupo Televisa S.A.B. The authors’ article also reviews other recent significant settlements in bribery-related securities suits. A version of this article previously was published as an ISS Securities Class Action Services client alert. I would like to thank Jeff and Jarett 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 like to submit a guest post. Here is the authors’ article. Continue Reading Guest Post: Allegations of Bribery to FIFA Officials Results in $95 Million Settlement
Drug Development Company Hit With COVID-Related Securities Suit
At this point late in the year, it is looking increasingly likely that 2022 will be a down year in terms of the number of securities class action lawsuit filings relative both to recent years and even relative to long term historical norms. However, an important (and arguably somewhat surprising) part of the securities suits that were filed this year is the significant number of COVID-related securities suits filed this year. I say “surprising” because it seems unexpected well into the third year that plaintiffs’ lawyers would be continuing to file these suits. In the latest example of these kinds of suits, earlier this week a plaintiff shareholder filed a securities class action lawsuit against the pharmaceutical company Veru, Inc. related to the company’s disclosures concerning its efforts to develop a COVID-related therapy drug. A copy of the December 5, 2022 complaint filed against Veru can be found here. Continue Reading Drug Development Company Hit With COVID-Related Securities Suit
Irish Court Lifts Corporate Veil to Hold Directors Liable
One of the fundamental principles of corporate law – in the U.S., as well as in other countries – is that a corporate entity has a legal existence separate and apart from its shareholders, officers, and directors, and that the individuals cannot be held personally liable for the debts and obligations of the company. However, in a recent extraordinary and noteworthy decision, the Irish High Court, applying Irish law, pierced the corporate veil in finding two Irish directors and two shadow directors personally liable in connection with a multinational fraud scheme. As discussed below, the decision underscores the importance of directors’ duties and their obligations to be informed about their companies’ operations. A copy of the Court’s October 28, 2022 decision can be found here. Continue Reading Irish Court Lifts Corporate Veil to Hold Directors Liable
Florida’s Politicians: Don’t Say ESG
On December 1, 2022, in a press release full of statements critical of the investment firm BlackRock and its CEO, Larry Fink, Jimmy Patronis, the Chief Financial Officer of Florida, announced that the Florida Treasury would begin divesting $2 billion of Florida state assets currently under management by BlackRock. The statement makes it clear that the Florida official is making the move because of his opposition to the investment firm’s activist positions, especially with respect to ESG issues. This development is the latest step in the process of the increasing politicization of ESG , a pattern that puts companies into the cross-fire as they contend with competing ESG expectations. The Florida CFO’s press December 1, 2022 press release can be found here. Continue Reading Florida’s Politicians: Don’t Say ESG