Tag: SCOTUS

SCOTUS upholds state court jurisdiction over class actions asserting only ’33 Act claims

Today, SCOTUS issued its opinion in Cyan Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund. The opinion by Justice Kagan for a unanimous Court answered two questions: Did the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 eliminate state court jurisdiction over class actions alleging only ’33 Act violations, and, even if not, under SLUSA, can defendants remove these state court actions to federal court? SCOTUS said no in both cases: “SLUSA did nothing to strip state courts of their longstanding jurisdiction to adjudicate class actions alleging only 1933 Act violations. Neither did SLUSA authorize removing such suits from state to federal court.”

SCOTUS says whistleblowers must whistle all the way to the SEC

Today, SCOTUS handed down its decision in Digital Realty v. Somers, a case addressing the split in the circuits regarding the application of the Dodd-Frank whistleblower anti-retaliation protections: do the protections apply regardless of whether the whistleblower blows the whistle all the way to the SEC or just reports internally to the company? You might recall that during the oral argument, the Justices seemed to signal that the plain language of the statute was clear and controlling, thus suggesting that they were likely to decide for Digital, interpreting the definition of “whistleblower” in the Dodd-Frank anti-retaliation provision narrowly to require SEC reporting as a predicate.  There were no surprises. As Justice Gorsuch remarked during oral argument, the Justices were largely “stuck on the plain language.”  The result may have an ironic impact:  while the win by Digital will limit the liability of companies under Dodd-Frank for retaliation against whistleblowers who do not report to the SEC, the holding that whistleblowers are not protected unless they report to the SEC may well drive all securities-law whistleblowers to the SEC to ensure their protection from retaliation under the statute—which just might not be a consequence that many companies would favor.

SCOTUS hears oral argument in Somers v. Digital Realty Trust: Dodd-Frank whistleblower statute “says what it says”

Yesterday, in addition to hearing oral argument regarding state court jurisdiction over ’33 Act class actions (see this PubCo post), SCOTUS also heard oral argument in a second case, Somers v. Digital Realty Trust.  This case addressed the split in the circuits regarding the application of the Dodd-Frank whistleblower anti-retaliation protections: do the protections apply regardless of whether the whistleblower blows the whistle all the way to the SEC or just reports internally to the company?   Here is a link to the transcript of the oral argument for Digital Realty, which is discussed below. 

Can SCOTUS make sense out of “gibberish”? SCOTUS hears oral argument in case addressing state court jurisdiction over ’33 Act cases

Yesterday, SCOTUS heard oral argument in Cyan Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund, which addressed whether state courts have jurisdiction over cases brought solely under the Securities Act of 1933.  Here is the transcript of the oral argument for Cyan, which is discussed briefly below.

SCOTUS grants cert in case involving whistleblower statute and case involving state court jurisdiction over ’33 Act cases

SCOTUS will be hearing at least two cases of interest next term: one case, Somers v. Digital Realty Trust, will address the split in the circuits regarding whether the Dodd-Frank whistleblower anti-retaliation provisions apply regardless of whether the whistleblower blows the whistle all the way to the SEC or just internally at the company. The second case,  Cyan Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund, will address whether state courts have jurisdiction over cases brought solely under the Securities Act of 1933 Act.

Adhering to Dirks, SCOTUS decides Salman v. US

by Cydney Posner In a case decided unanimously today, Salman v. United States, SCOTUS upheld the Ninth Circuit affirmation of Bassam Salman’s conviction for insider trading, “adher[ing] to Dirks, which easily resolves the narrow issue presented here.”

In re Sanofi: 2d circuit considers misleading statements of opinion after Omnicare

by Cydney Posner In an early appellate decision applying Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund,  a three-judge panel of the 2d Circuit,  on March 4, issued its opinion in  In re Sanofi. The plaintiffs in that case had alleged that defendants’ material omissions regarding a drug candidate – […]