U.S. listed companies must comply with the SEC’s periodic disclosure requirements. The problem for reporting companies is that company disclosures and omissions can become the basis of liability claims and governmental investigations. In the following guest post, Liz Dunshee and Nessim Mezrahi consider the ways that companies can use data analytics to guide their disclosure decisions. Liz is a shareholder at the Fredrikson & Byron law firm and Nessim is co-founder and CEO at SAR LLC. A version of this article previously was published on Law360. I would like to thank Liz and Nessim 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 site’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Liz and Nessim’s article. Continue Reading Guest Post: Using Data to Inform Corporate Disclosure Decisions
The extraordinary levels of securities litigation filings during 2017 have been the subject of numerous commentaries, including 
We have seen the scenario before – shortly after its debut, an IPO company releases unexpected results, the company’s share price declines, and the lawsuits appear. Usually when this happens, the updated results pertain to reporting periods following the IPO. But what about a situation where the disappointing results pertain to a reporting period that was completed prior to the IPO – in fact, the day before the IPO? That was the situation involving Vivint Solar, where the company released results for the reporting period ending September 30, 2014 – that is, just a day before the company’s October 1, 2014 IPO –several weeks after the company’s debut.
In the wake of the era of corporate scandals, Congress enacted the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. 
On Monday, June 11, 2012, the United States Supreme Court granted the petition of Amgen for a writ of certiorari in a securities lawsuit pending against the company. As a result, next term the Court will be addressing the question of whether securities plaintiffs must establish in their class certification petition that the alleged misrepresentation
In a February 10, 2011 opinion (
There was a time when it was relatively rare for the Supreme Court to take up securities cases. Until recently, the Court basically went several years between cases filed under the securities laws. Those days are clearly over, as the Court has granted cert petitions in several securities cases in recent years, including the