Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In Tellabs v. Makor Issues & Rights Ltd. (June 21, 2007), the U.S. Supreme Court offered clarity on the requirement in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the 'PSLRA') that plaintiffs in securities fraud actions plead with particularity facts giving rise to a 'strong inference' of scienter. Basically, the Court was asked to decide how to address pleadings when there are contrasting inferences with respect to scienter. On this point, the Court held by an 8-1 vote that to qualify as 'strong' within the meaning of ' 21D(b)(2) of the PSLRA, an inference of scienter must be more than 'merely plausible or reasonable.' The Court ruled that the trial court must balance competing inferences raised by the parties' pleadings and before the trial court and that '[a] complaint will survive only if a reasonable person would deem the inference of scienter cogent and at least as compelling as any plausible opposing inference one could draw from the facts alleged.'
There has been some disagreement on the impact of the ruling. Some commentators and most media suggest that the Tellabs decision is a positive ruling for companies and executives, making it more difficult for shareholder-plaintiffs to sue companies and executives or win substantial damages. In contrast, recognizing that the Court is seemingly pro-business, some commentators consider it a minor victory for shareholders that the Court did not adopt Justice Scalia's view (expressed in his concurring opinion) that equally competing inferences cannot establish scienter, the willful intent to commit fraud. In fact, some commentators have gone so far as to suggest that the majority's 'prescriptions' actually do not differ from what courts already follow and that the Court whiffled on a golden opportunity to drastically limit class actions.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.