Tag: SCOTUS

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 – […]

SCOTUS decides Omnicare: 6th Circuit applied incorrect standards in the context of liability under §11 for statements of opinion

by Cydney Posner Today, SCOTUS issued its opinion in Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund.   In the case, SCOTUS answers these questions: First, when can a statement of opinion be considered a “false statement of material fact”? That is, for purposes of §11, a “strict […]

SCOTUS hears Omnicare: when can a statement of opinion be actionable as a “false statement of material fact”?

by Cydney Posner Yesterday, SCOTUS heard oral argument  in Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund. The case seeks to answer this question: when can a statement of opinion be actionable as a “false statement of material fact”?  That is, for purposes of Section 11, a “strict […]