ALI-ABA Course of Study Regulation D Offerings and Private Placements
|
|
- Gloria Norman
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 427 ALI-ABA Course of Study Regulation D Offerings and Private Placements Cosponsored by the Securities Law Committee of the Federal Bar Association March 12-14, 2009 Scottsdale, Arizona Private Placements: Civil Liabilities under the Federal Securities Laws By J. William Hicks Indiana University-Bloomington School of Law Bloomington, Indiana
2 428 2
3 429 I. Primary Liability PRIVATE PLACEMENTS: CIVIL LIABILITIES UNDER THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS By J. William Hicks Sellers of securities in unregistered offerings can encounter primary civil liability for two types of unlawful activity: violations of the registration and prospectus delivery requirements under Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933 (1933 Act) and violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the 1933 Act and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (1934 Act). A seller of an unregistered security violates Section 5 of the 1933 Act where he or she is unable to prove that the security or the transaction, of which the unregistered offer or sale was a part, was exempt. The SEC may seek administrative or judicial relief, including, where appropriate, civil penalties, against any person who violates Section 5. See, e.g., S.E.C. v.berry, 2008 WL , at **1-5 (N.D. Cal. 2008); S.E.C. v. Fisher, 2008 WL , at **3-6 (E.D. Mich. 2008). Section 12(a)(1) of the 1933 Act provides the express right of action for certain purchasers of unregistered securities to recover damages from the seller who violates Section 5. Sellers of unregistered securities risk primary liable to purchasers for material misrepresentations or omissions of fact that they make in connection with the offer and sale of the securities. Section 12(a)(2) of the 1933 Act and Section 10(b) of the 1934 Act, and Rule 10b- 5 thereunder, are the basis for such causes of action. Purchasers of unregistered securities can be liable for damages to sellers if they violate Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5. Section 17 of the 1933 Act and Section 10(b) of the 1934 Act each provides a statutory basis for SEC sanctions against persons who engage in fraudulent securities activities. A. Section 12(a)(1) of the 1933 Act 1. Introduction Section 12(a)(1) imposes civil liability on "[a]ny person who offers or sells a security in violation of section 5..." Where successful, a purchaser may recover rescissory damages. In order to state a prima facie case under Section 12(a)(1) a plaintiff who purchased unregistered securities must prove: (1) A registration statement covering the securities was not in effect; (2) The defendant offered or sold the security to the plaintiff; 1
4 430 (3) The mails or facilities of interstate commerce were used in connection with the offer or sale, (see, e.g., Swenson v. Engelstad, 626 F.2d 421, 424 (5th Cir.1980)); and (4) The action is timely under the statute of limitations in Section 13. (see, e.g., Piper Acceptance Corp. v. Slaughter, 600 F. Supp. 169, 172 (D. Colo. 1985)). Once the plaintiff has presented its case, the burden shifts to the defendant to prove the availability of an exemption. The defendant must demonstrate that it satisfied all of the terms and conditions of an exemption for each transaction. Where a seller breaks an offering into small pieces in order to avoid the requirements of Section 5, the doctrine of integration allows a court to decide whether the offers and sales constitute a single transaction and to test the entire plan of financing against the conditions of an exemption. See Donohoe v. Consolidated Operating & Prod. Corp., 982 F.2d 1130, 1140 (7th Cir. 1992) (integration not required); SEC v. Melchior, 1993 WL 89141, [ Transfer Binder] Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) 97,356 (D. Utah 1993)(offerings integrated for purposes of Regulation D); Johnston v. Bumba, 764 F. Supp (N.D. Ill. 1991)(integration); Walker v. Montclaire Housing Partners, 736 F. Supp. 1358, (M.D.N.C. 1990)(integration for purposes of blue sky law). 2. The Seller Requirement Section 12 requires a plaintiff to plead the seller status of the defendant. This requirement is found in language common to Sections 12(a)(1) and 12(a)(2), which extends liability to "[a]ny person who offers or sells a security" and makes that person liable "to the person purchasing such security from him." Recently, the Supreme Court stated that Section 12(a)(1) "liability extends only to the person who successfully solicits the purchase, motivated at least in part by a desire to serve his own financial interest or those of the securities owner." Pinter v. Dahl, 486 U.S. 622, 647, (1988). The Court expressly rejected the substantial factor test adopted by a majority of circuits. It opted instead to create a standard based on strict privity and financial benefit. See, e.g., Harelson v. Miller Financial Corp., 854 F.2d 1141 (9th Cir. 1988), cert. denied sub nom. Wilson v. Harelson, 488 U.S. 917 (1988). Under Pinter, a complaint will be dismissed unless it contains an allegation of direct and active participation in the solicitation of the immediate sale. See, e.g.,maher v. Durango Metals, Inc., 144 F.3d 1302, 1307 (10th Cir. 1998); In re Westinghouse Sec. Lit., 90 F.3d 696, 717 n. 19 (3rd Cir. 1996); Silva Run Worldwide Limited v. Gaming Lottery Corp., 1998 WL (S.D.N.Y. 1998). The Seventh Circuit has held that attorneys who furnish advice are not "sellers" for Section 12 purposes. Ackerman v. Schwartz, 947 F.2d 841 (7th Cir. 1991). 3. Statute of Limitations (a) Introduction 2
5 431 Section 13 imposes two limitations on Section 12(a)(1) actions that are cumulative. First, a Section 12(a)(1) action must be brought within one year of the violation. Second, in no event may the Section 12(a)(1) action commence any later than three years after the security was offered to the public. Compliance with the statute of limitations is a matter of substance, not procedure. Toombs v. Leone, 777 F.2d 465, 468 (9th Cir. 1985); Shotto v. Laub, 635 F. Supp. 835, 837 (D. Md. 1986). This means that the plaintiff's complaint must set forth the date upon which the defendant allegedly violated Section 5 and the date that the security was bona fide offered to the public. (b) Within One Year of Violation The one year statute of limitations required by Section 13 begins to run from the date of the violation. Section 12(a)(1) imposes liability on any person who violates the registration and prospectus delivery requirements of Section 5. The Section 5 obligations extend to an offer, sale and delivery of a security. For purposes of Section 13, a Section 12(a)(1) claimant should first determine at which of the three stages -- offer, sale or delivery -- the defendant violated Section 5. Where a violation occurs at more than one stage in the transaction, many courts have used the most lenient standard to measure the limitation period. If the plaintiff's complaint was filed within one year of the last of these events, the statute of limitations is not a bar. See, e.g., Doran v. Petroleum Management Corp., 576 F.2d 91, 93 (5th Cir. 1978); Folse v. Combined Equities, 592 F. Supp. 559, 562 (W.D. La. 1984). (c) No More Than Three Years Not only must the plaintiff file a Section 12(a)(1) claim within one year of the violation, he must also file it "no more than three years after the security is bona fide offered to the public." P.Stolz Family Partnership L.P. v. Daum, 355 F.3d 92 (2d Cir. 2004); LeCroy v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 585 F. Supp. 753, 760 (E.D. Ark. 1984). The language of Section 13, as it pertains to the three year limitation, appears to have no application to non-public offerings. Courts have not interpreted the language so narrowly, however. The three year limitation begins to run from the date of the first offer of a security that is connected with the transaction of which plaintiff's purchase is a part. Assume, for example, that on February 1, Limited Partnership L makes its first offer to sell unregistered limited partnership interests to a prospective investor who does not accept. L's first sale occurs on February 10. The plaintiff, P, purchases an interest on February 21. The offering is fully subscribed by March 10. The one year limitation on P's Section 12(a)(1) claim commenced on February 10 but the three year limitation began on February 1. (d) Equitable Tolling 3
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review Volume 11 Issue 4 Article 8 1988 Securities Section 12(1) Seller Liability Limited to Persons Who Pass Title or Solicit Securities Sales for Financial Gain.
More informationALI-ABA Course of Study Regulation D Offerings and Private Placements
381 ALI-ABA Course of Study Regulation D Offerings and Private Placements Cosponsored by the Securities Law Section of the Federal Bar Association March 15-17, 2012 Scottsdale, Arizona Due Diligence in
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before MURPHY, HOLLOWAY, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit June 6, 2012 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT ROBERT G. WING, as Receiver for VESCOR CAPITAL CORP., a
More informationA Cause of Action for Option Traders Against Insider Option Traders
University of California, Hastings College of the Law UC Hastings Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship 1988 A Cause of Action for Option Traders Against Insider Option Traders William K.S. Wang UC
More informationCENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL ====== PRESENT: THE HONORABLE S. JAMES OTERO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:11-cv-04175-SJO -PLA UNITED Document STATES 11 DISTRICT Filed 08/10/11 COURT Page 1 of Priority 5 Page ID #:103 Send Enter Closed JS-5/JS-6 Scan Only TITLE: James McFadden et. al. v. National Title
More informationALI-ABA Course of Study Regulation D Offerings and Private Placements
493 ALI-ABA Course of Study Regulation D Offerings and Private Placements Cosponsored by the Securities Law Committee of the Federal Bar Association March 18-20, 2010 Scottsdale, Arizona Due Diligence
More informationCase 1:04-md LAK-HBP Document 1636 Filed 08/11/2008 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:04-md-01653-LAK-HBP Document 1636 Filed 08/11/2008 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
More informationDefinition of a Security: Long-Term Promissory Notes
Louisiana Law Review Volume 35 Number 2 The Work of the Louisiana Appellate Courts for the 1973-1974 Term: A Symposium Winter 1975 Definition of a Security: Long-Term Promissory Notes Craig W. Murray Repository
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS MOTIONS TO DISMISS (DKT. NOS. 14, 21)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN JENNIFER MYERS, Case No. 15-cv-965-pp Plaintiff, v. AMERICOLLECT INC., and AURORA HEALTH CARE INC., Defendants. ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ORDER
Northumberland County Retirement System et al v. GMX Resources Inc et al Doc. 133 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY ) RETIREMENT SYSTEM, et
More informationMissouri Law Review. Robert L. Ortbals Jr. Volume 68 Issue 3 Summer Article 5. Summer 2003
Missouri Law Review Volume 68 Issue 3 Summer 2003 Article 5 Summer 2003 Continuation of the Tracing Doctrine: Giving Aftermarket Purchasers Standing under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 - Lee
More informationSECURITIES REGULATION & LAW
A BNA, INC. SECURITIES REGULATION & LAW! REPORT Reproduced with permission from Securities Regulation & Law Report, Vol. 36, No. 38, 09/27/2004, pp. 1728-1733. Copyright 2004 by The Bureau of National
More informationCase 3:16-cv AC Document 80 Filed 06/10/16 Page 1 of 25
Case 3:16-cv-00580-AC Document 80 Filed 06/10/16 Page 1 of 25 Philip S. Van Der Weele, OSB #863650 Email: phil.vanderweele@klgates.com B. John Casey, OSB #120025 Email: john.casey@klgates.com Adam Holbrook,
More informationSecurities Section 4(2) Offer abd Sale of Unregistered Securities Does Not Constitute a Private Offering Where Purchasers Did Not in Fact
Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School Digital Commons at Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review Law Reviews 8-1-1972 Securities Section 4(2) Offer
More informationCourthouse News Service
Case 3:07-cv-01782-L Document 87 Filed 07/10/2009 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION JOMAR OIL LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ENERGYTEC INC., et al.,
More informationCase 1:13-cv RJS Document 34 Filed 05/13/14 Page 1 of 18 ) ) ECF CASE ) )
Case 1:13-cv-06882-RJS Document 34 Filed 05/13/14 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) JOHN ORTUZAR, Individually and On Behalf ) of All Others Similarly Situated,
More informationA Short Guide to the Prosecution of Market Manipulation in the Energy Industry: CFTC, FERC, and FTC
JULY 2008, RELEASE TWO A Short Guide to the Prosecution of Market Manipulation in the Energy Industry: CFTC, FERC, and FTC Layne Kruse and Amy Garzon Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P. A Short Guide to the Prosecution
More informationSecurities Fraud -- Fraudulent Conduct Under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940
University of Miami Law School Institutional Repository University of Miami Law Review 10-1-1964 Securities Fraud -- Fraudulent Conduct Under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 Barry N. Semet Follow this
More informationNinth Circuit Establishes Pleading Requirements for Alleging Scheme Liability Under 10(b) and Rule 10b-5(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
July 24, 2006 EIGHTY PINE STREET NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10005-1702 TELEPHONE: (212) 701-3000 FACSIMILE: (212) 269-5420 This memorandum is for general information purposes only and does not represent our legal
More informationCase 1:14-cv CRC Document 222 Filed 10/03/18 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
Case 1:14-cv-01002-CRC Document 222 Filed 10/03/18 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, Case No. 1:14-cv-01002 (CRC)
More informationTort Liability for Misstatements or Omissions in Sales of Securities
Cleveland State University EngagedScholarship@CSU Cleveland State Law Review Law Journals 1963 Tort Liability for Misstatements or Omissions in Sales of Securities Lawrence J. Hayes Follow this and additional
More informationBroker-Dealer Responsibility in Reguation D Transacctions
Fordham Urban Law Journal Volume 17 Number 1 Article 3 1988 Broker-Dealer Responsibility in Reguation D Transacctions Matthew Joonho Jeon Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. Case CIV-WPD ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS
1 Erbey and Faris will be collectively referred to as the Individual Defendants. Case 9:14-cv-81057-WPD Document 81 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/22/2015 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND ) EXCHANGE COMMISSION, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) No. 11 C 7152 v. ) ) Judge Sara L. Ellis GREGORY E. WEBB
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA WESTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA WESTERN DIVISION THE JOHN ERNST LUCKEN REVOCABLE TRUST, and JOHN LUCKEN and MARY LUCKEN, Trustees, Plaintiffs, No. 16-CV-4005-MWB vs.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff,
1 1 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiff, LOUIS V. SCHOOLER and FIRST FINANCIAL PLANNING CORPORATION, dba Western Financial Planning
More informationCorporate Rescission Offers under the Nebraska Securities Act
Nebraska Law Review Volume 58 Issue 3 Article 5 1979 Corporate Rescission Offers under the Nebraska Securities Act Barry K. Lake Nebraska Department of Banking and Finance, barryklake@yahoo.com Follow
More informationCase 1:12-cv JLG Document 140 Filed 01/30/13 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:12-cv-05803-JLG Document 140 Filed 01/30/13 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CROWN CORK & SEAL COMPANY, INC. MASTER RETIREMENT TRUST, et al., CREDIT SUISSE
More informationPinter v. Dahl: The Supreme Court's Attempt to Redefine The "Statutory Sellor" Under Section 12 of the Securities Act of 1933
Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law Volume 4 Issue 1 Article 6 3-1-1990 Pinter v. Dahl: The Supreme Court's Attempt to Redefine The "Statutory Sellor" Under Section 12 of the Securities Act
More information2:11-cv LPZ-MKM Doc # 63 Filed 07/02/12 Pg 1 of 25 Pg ID 908 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
2:11-cv-10949-LPZ-MKM Doc # 63 Filed 07/02/12 Pg 1 of 25 Pg ID 908 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. 11-cv-10949-LPZ-MKM
More informationrdd Doc 202 Filed 07/29/13 Entered 07/29/13 13:51:42 Main Document Pg 1 of 13
Pg 1 of 13 FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP (formed in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania) 2000 Market Street, Twentieth Floor Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 299-2000 (phone)/(215) 299-6834 (fax) Michael G. Menkowitz, Esquire
More informationunassigned Aycock Engineering, Inc. v. Airflite, Inc., (Fed. Cir. 2009)
Use in commerce modalities Use in commerce as jurisdictional requirement Larry Harmon Pictures Corp. v. Williams Restaurant Corp., 929 F.2d 662 (Fed. Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 823 (1991) (finding
More informationCase 1:16-cv VM Document 69 Filed 05/23/17 Page 1 of 25. Plaintiffs, Defendants. VICTOR MARRERO, United States District Judge.
Case 1:16-cv-04923-VM Document 69 Filed 05/23/17 Page 1 of 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------x YI XIANG, et. al., USDCSDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY
More information2(f) --Creates liability for the knowing recipient of a discriminatory price.
ROBINSON-PATMAN ACT I. INTRODUCTION The Robinson-Patman Act was enacted in 1936 to solidify and enhance the Clayton Act's attack on discriminatory pricing. The Act was designed to address specific types
More informationCase: 1:12-cv CAB Doc #: 4 Filed: 07/31/12 1 of 8. PageID #: 84 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO.
Case: 1:12-cv-01954-CAB Doc #: 4 Filed: 07/31/12 1 of 8. PageID #: 84 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, MICHAEL A. BODANZA and
More informationUnited States District Court
Case:0-cv-00-PJH Document Filed0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ORACLE AMERICA, INC., Plaintiff, No. C 0-0 PJH 0 0 v. ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STRIKE AFFIRMATIVE
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. For the Northern District of California 11. No.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 MICHAEL ALLAGAS, ARTHUR RAY, AND BRETT MOHRMAN, et al., v. Plaintiffs, BP SOLAR INTERNATIONAL INC., HOME
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO. Plaintiffs, Defendants.
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 RAOUL D. KENNEDY (SB #0) raoul.kennedy@skadden.com SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP University Avenue, Suite 100 Palo Alto, California 01 Telephone: (0) 0-00 Facsimile: (0)
More informationa. The Act is effective July 4, 1975 and applies to goods manufactured after that date.
THE MAGNUSON-MOSS WARRANTY ACT AN OVERVIEW In 1975 Congress adopted a piece of landmark legislation, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. The Act was designed to prevent manufacturers from drafting grossly
More informationCase 1:03-cv LJM-TAB Document 745 Filed 05/22/07 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 8174
Case 1:03-cv-01659-LJM-TAB Document 745 Filed 05/22/07 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 8174 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, ) )
More informationUSDC SCAN INDEX SHEET JAH 7/ 28/06 8:24 3:05-CV MCPHAIL V. FIRST COMMAND *121* *0.*
USDC SCAN INDEX SHEET JAH / /0 : :0-CV-001 MCPHAIL V. FIRST COMMAND *1* *0.* 1 lls JIJL Fil I ^ 00 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MICHAEL MCPHAIL, et. al., CASE NO. 0cv1 IEG
More informationCase 1:09-cv NMG Document 29 Filed 12/01/2009 Page 1 of 12. United States District Court District of Massachusetts MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Case 1:09-cv-10555-NMG Document 29 Filed 12/01/2009 Page 1 of 12 STEPHANIE CATANZARO, Plaintiff, v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., TRANS UNION, LLC and VERIZON NEW ENGLAND, INC. Defendants. GORTON,
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT KANSAS CITY
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT KANSAS CITY STATE OF MISSOURI, ex rel. JEREMIAH W. (JAY) NIXON, Attorney General, Plaintiff, vs. INTERACTIVE GAMING & COMMUNICATIONS CORP., a Delaware
More informationCase 2:01-x JAC Document 57 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case 2:01-x-70414-JAC Document 57 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. WALTER MARK LAZAR, v. Plaintiffs
More informationThe Louisiana Blue Sky Law
Louisiana Law Review Volume 3 Number 4 May 1941 The Louisiana Blue Sky Law Howard W. Wright Jr. Repository Citation Howard W. Wright Jr., The Louisiana Blue Sky Law, 3 La. L. Rev. (1941) Available at:
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE
Case :0-cv-000-RSL Document Filed // Page of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel., et al., v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE Plaintiffs/Relators, CENTER FOR DIAGNOSTIC
More informationSECURITIES LITIGATION & REGULATION
Westlaw Journal SECURITIES LITIGATION & REGULATION Litigation News and Analysis Legislation Regulation Expert Commentary VOLUME 20, ISSUE 14 / NOVEMBER 13, 2014 EXPERT ANALYSIS Beyond Halliburton: Securities
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No.: 09-cv-02676 CMA MJW IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, v. Plaintiff, MANTRIA CORPORATION, TROY B. WRAGG, AMANDA E. KNORR,
More informationCase , Document 53-1, 04/10/2018, , Page1 of 19
17-1085-cv O Donnell v. AXA Equitable Life Ins. Co. 1 In the 2 United States Court of Appeals 3 For the Second Circuit 4 5 6 7 August Term 2017 8 9 Argued: October 25, 2017 10 Decided: April 10, 2018 11
More informationOPINION AND ORDER. Securities Class Action Complaint ("Complaint") pursuant to Rules 9(b) and 12(b)(6) of the
ORIGI NAL ' Case 1:05-cv-05323-LTS Document 62 Filed 07/14/2006 Page 1 of 14 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOC #: x DATE FILED: D 7/,V/
More informationInsider Trading and Rule 10b-5: A New Remedy
University of Miami Law School Institutional Repository University of Miami Law Review 10-1-1971 Insider Trading and Rule 10b-5: A New Remedy Malcolm H. Neuwahl Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr
More informationThe Scope of Purchase and Sale Under Rule 10b-5: Northland Capital Corp. v. Silver, 735 F.2d 1421 (D.C. Cir. 1984)
Washington University Law Review Volume 63 Issue 2 January 1985 The Scope of Purchase and Sale Under Rule 10b-5: Northland Capital Corp. v. Silver, 735 F.2d 1421 (D.C. Cir. 1984) James G. Buell Follow
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 13-791 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States JOHN J. MOORES, et al., Petitioners, v. DAVID HILDES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF THE DAVID AND KATHLEEN HILDES 1999 CHARITABLE REMAINDER UNITRUST
More information(Argued: February 21, 2007 Decided: June 6, 2007) Docket No cv
06-0784 Roth v. Jennings UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 2006 (Argued: February 21, 2007 Decided: June 6, 2007) Docket No. 06-0784-cv ANDREW E. ROTH, derivatively on
More informationMotion To Dismiss. Pacific Continental Bank And Century Bank s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint
Motion To Dismiss 1 Pacific Continental Bank And Century Bank s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint Cox v. Holcomb Family Limited Partnership Case No. 1308-12201 Hon. Youlee Yim You October
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, (Argued: February 21, 2007 Decided: June 6, 2007)
0-0 Roth v. Jennings 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT - - - - - - August Term, 00 (Argued: February 1, 00 Decided: June, 00) 1 1 0 1 Docket No. 0-0-cv ANDREW E. ROTH, derivatively
More informationThis is a securities fraud case involving trading in commercial mortgage-backed
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, -v- 17-CV-3613 (JPO) OPINION AND ORDER JAMES H. IM, Defendant. J. PAUL OETKEN, District Judge:
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CRIMINAL ACTION NO. Plaintiff, 3:02-CR-164-D v. XXXX, Defendants. DEFENDANT XXXX, S MOTION FOR A BILL OF
More informationHB By Representatives Williams (J), Greer and Henry. RFD: Commerce and Small Business. First Read: 16-APR-13. Page 0
HB1-1 By Representatives Williams (J), Greer and Henry RFD: Commerce and Small Business First Read: 1-APR-1 Page 0 -1:n:0/0/01:LLR/th LRS01-1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 SYNOPSIS: Under existing law, a product liability
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, (Argued: August 31, 2015 Decided: July 14, 2016) Docket No.
0 0 0 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 0 (Argued: August, 0 Decided: July, 0) Docket No. 0 cv SRM GLOBAL MASTER FUND LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Plaintiff Appellant, v. BEAR
More informationAn Attorney's Responsibilities under Federal and State Securities Laws: Private Counselor or Public Servant
California Law Review Volume 61 Issue 5 Article 2 September 1973 An Attorney's Responsibilities under Federal and State Securities Laws: Private Counselor or Public Servant Marshall L. Small Follow this
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Case No.: Plaintiff, Defendants
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PLAINTIFF, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Case No.: vs. Plaintiff, CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF THE
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals
In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 11-1976 IRENE DIXON, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, ATI LADISH LLC, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court
More informationLawrence Walker v. Comm Social Security
2010 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2-2-2010 Lawrence Walker v. Comm Social Security Precedential or Non-Precedential: Precedential Docket No. 08-1446 Follow
More informationDIRECTORS AND OFFICERS LIABILITY BANKRUPTCY STAYS OF LITIGATION AGAINST NON-DEBTORS JUNE 12, 2003 JOSEPH M. MCLAUGHLIN S IMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP
DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS LIABILITY BANKRUPTCY STAYS OF LITIGATION AGAINST NON-DEBTORS JOSEPH M. MCLAUGHLIN SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP JUNE 12, 2003 Most courts have held the insured versus insured exclusion
More informationLiability Of Broker-Dealers For The Fraudulent Acts Of Their Salesmen Under The Securities Act Of Johns Hopkins University v.
Maryland Law Review Volume 29 Issue 1 Article 7 Liability Of Broker-Dealers For The Fraudulent Acts Of Their Salesmen Under The Securities Act Of 1933 - Johns Hopkins University v. Hutton Follow this and
More information/Cross-Complainant )
1 1 1 1 Alleged Defendant/Cross-Complainant Name of Court ASSET ACCEPTANCE, LLC.; Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant vs., an individual; Defendant /Cross-Complainant CASE NO. HONORABLE NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Case 009-cv-01750-ADM -JSM Document 153 Filed 10/25/10 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION
More informationCRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web
CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web 98-164 A Updated May 20, 1998 Uniform Standards in Private Securities Litigation: Limitations on Shareholder Lawsuits Michael V. Seitzinger Legislative
More informationNOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 10a0307n.06. No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 10a0307n.06 No. 09-5907 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, BRIAN M. BURR, On Appeal
More informationCase 1:17-cv CMH-IDD Document 93 Filed 09/05/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID# 1129
Case 1:17-cv-01459-CMH-IDD Document 93 Filed 09/05/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID# 1129 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division XIA BI, et al., Plaintiffs, v.
More informationThrough the Private Securities. U.S.C. 78u-4 ( PSLRA ), and the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998, 15 U.S.C.
B y R o b e r t H. K l o n o f f a n d D a v i d L. H o r a n Through the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 15 U.S.C. 78u-4 ( PSLRA ), and the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY SOUTHERN DIVISION (at London) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) *** *** *** ***
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY SOUTHERN DIVISION (at London TASHA BAIRD, V. Plaintiff, BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Defendant. Civil Action No. 6: 13-077-DCR MEMORANDUM
More informationMEMORANDUM OPINION. Thomas J. McKenna Gregory M. Egleston GAINEY MCKENNA & EGLESTON Attorneys for Lead Plaintiff
Case 1:12-cv-01041-LAK Document 49 Filed 09/30/14 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
More informationEthical Issues Facing In-House Legal Counsel
Ethical Issues Facing In-House Legal Counsel 2017 ACC Fall Symposium October 6, 2017 Today s Presenter(s): Lynn W. Hartman Member Simmons Perrine Moyer Bergman, PLC Phone: 319-896-4083 Email: lhartman@spmblaw.com
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JOBE DANGANAN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. GUARDIAN PROTECTION SERVICES, Defendant.
More informationVicarious Liability for Securities Law Violations: Respondeat Superior and the Controlling Person Sections
William & Mary Law Review Volume 15 Issue 3 Article 12 Vicarious Liability for Securities Law Violations: Respondeat Superior and the Controlling Person Sections Repository Citation Vicarious Liability
More informationIn 5th Circ., Time Is Not On SEC s Side
Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com In 5th Circ., Time Is Not On SEC s Side Law360, New
More information1. "Applicant" means a person applying for registration under this chapter.
IOWA 9D.1 Definitions. 1. "Applicant" means a person applying for registration under this chapter. 2. "Customer" means a person who is offered or who purchases travel services. 3. "Registrant" means a
More informationCase 3:16-cv EMC Document 311 Filed 02/12/18 Page 1 of 7
Case :-cv-0-emc Document Filed 0// Page of JINA L. CHOI (N.Y. Bar No. ) JOHN S. YUN (Cal. Bar No. 0) yunj@sec.gov MARC D. KATZ (Cal. Bar No. ) katzma@sec.gov JESSICA W. CHAN (Cal. Bar No. ) chanjes@sec.gov
More informationNew Thinking Fashion USA, Inc. v ZG Apparel Group, LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 30524(U) March 29, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:
New Thinking Fashion USA, Inc. v ZG Apparel Group, LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 30524(U) March 29, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 652186/15 Judge: Ellen M. Coin Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,
More informationThe Scope of Liability Under Section 12 of the Securities Act of 1933: "Participation" and the Pertinent Legislative Materials
Fordham Urban Law Journal Volume 15 Number 4 Article 2 1987 The Scope of Liability Under Section 12 of the Securities Act of 1933: "Participation" and the Pertinent Legislative Materials Douglas E. Abrams
More informationCase 8:09-cv PJM Document 24 Filed 08/13/09 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND MEMORANDUM OPINION
Case 8:09-cv-00005-PJM Document 24 Filed 08/13/09 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND WARD KLUGMANN, et al. * * Plaintiffs * * v. * Civil No. PJM 09-5 * AMERICAN
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2009
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2009 Opinion filed October 14, 2009. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D09-591 Lower Tribunal No. 08-56866
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
-WMC SEC v. Presto, et al Doc. 1 1 1 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, vs. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiff, PRESTO TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC., AND ALFRED LOUIS VASSALLO,
More informationConversion Of Customers' Property By Securities Professionals: The Applicabilty Of Rule 10B-5 In The "Contraction Era"
Washington and Lee Law Review Volume 44 Issue 3 Article 11 Summer 6-1-1987 Conversion Of Customers' Property By Securities Professionals: The Applicabilty Of Rule 10B-5 In The "Contraction Era" Follow
More informationSecurities--Investment Advisers Act--"Scalping" Held To Be Fraudulent Practice (SEC v. Capital Gains Research Bureau, Inc., 375 U.S.
St. John's Law Review Volume 38 Issue 2 Volume 38, May 1964, Number 2 Article 10 May 2013 Securities--Investment Advisers Act--"Scalping" Held To Be Fraudulent Practice (SEC v. Capital Gains Research Bureau,
More informationCase 9:09-cv RC Document 100 Filed 08/10/12 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 991 **NOT FOR PRINTED PUBLICATION**
Case 9:09-cv-00124-RC Document 100 Filed 08/10/12 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 991 **NOT FOR PRINTED PUBLICATION** IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION UNITED
More informationLatham & Watkins Litigation Department Securities Litigation and Professional Liability Practice
Number 1312 April 4, 2012 Client Alert While the Second Circuit s formulation answers some questions about what transactions fall within the scope of Section 10(b), it also raises a host of new questions
More informationNo Equitable Tolling of Section 548 Look-Back Period. March/April Haben Goitom
No Equitable Tolling of Section 548 Look-Back Period March/April 2012 Haben Goitom In Industrial Enterprises of America v. Burtis (In re Pitt Penn Holding Co., Inc.), 2012 WL 204095 (Bankr. D. Del. Jan.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Savannah College of Art and Design, Inc. v. Sportswear, Inc. Doc. 53 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION SAVANNAH COLLEGE OF ART AND DESIGN, INC.,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN DIVISIO N
NORMAN OTTMAN, Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN DIVISIO N V. Civil Action No. AW-00-350 8 HANGER ORTHOPEDIC GROUP, INC., IVAL R. SABEL, and RICHARD A.
More informationPlaintiff, : : : : John Sgaliordich is an individual investor who alleges that various investment
-VVP Sgaliordich v. Lloyd's Asset Management et al Doc. 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------ X JOHN ANTHONY SGALIORDICH,
More information)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Before the COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION In the Matter of: Martin A. Lorenzen, Respondent. CFTC Docket No. 13-16 -------------------- ORDER INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ) )
Case 4:15-cv-00324-GKF-TLW Document 65 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 04/25/16 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, )
More informationADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENTS TRADEMARK
ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENTS TRADEMARK GOOGLE INC. V. AMERICAN BLIND & WALLPAPER FACTORY, INC. 2007 WL 1159950 (N.D. Cal. April 17, 2007) BOSTON DUCK TOURS, LP V. SUPER DUCK TOURS, LLC 527 F.Supp.2d 205 (D.
More information: : : : : : : : : : x. Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, bring this action, inter
-SMG Yahraes et al v. Restaurant Associates Events Corp. et al Doc. 112 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------------- x
More informationCase: 1:16-cv Document #: 45 Filed: 08/03/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:189
Case: 1:16-cv-07054 Document #: 45 Filed: 08/03/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:189 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION SAMUEL LIT, Plaintiff, v. No. 16 C 7054 Judge
More informationAct 17 Trademarks Act 2010
ACTS SUPPLEMENT No. 7 3rd September, 2010. ACTS SUPPLEMENT to The Uganda Gazette No. 53 Volume CIII dated 3rd September, 2010. Printed by UPPC, Entebbe, by Order of the Government. Act 17 Trademarks Act
More informationCase 2:14-cv APG-PAL Document 13 Filed 12/10/14 Page 1 of 17
Case 2:14-cv-00623-APG-PAL Document 13 Filed 12/10/14 Page 1 of 17 Stephen W. Simpson Timothy N. England Stephen L. Cohen U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20549
More information