Posts tagged as:

securities litigation

According to the Harvard Law School online catalog, the SRP is “a newly established clinical program” that “will provide students with the opportunity to obtain hands-on experience with shareholder rights work by assisting public pension funds in improving governance arrangements at publicly traded firms.”

Marty Lipton and others at Wachtell, Lipton don’t like the idea and criticize it here. More at NYT DealBook (via Bainbridge).

Reader J.B. emails to say:

Whatever one thinks of Wachtell’s substantive critique of the attack on classified/staggered boards, it’s kind of interesting for a law school to be promoting a “clinical program” in which the kids get to work for institutional investors with bajillions of dollars in assets (and, you know, the wherewithal to retain sophisticated counsel at market rates) rather than the sort of boring old indigent individuals that are the traditional law school clinic client base.

A different view: Max Kennerly.

{ 3 comments }

February 29 roundup

by Walter Olson on February 29, 2012

  • Jackpot justice and New Jersey pharmacies (with both a Whitney Houston and a Ted Frank angle) [Fox, PoL, our Jan. 3 post]
  • New Mexico: “Trial lawyers object to spaceport limits” [Las Cruces Bulletin]
  • Dodd-Frank: too big not to fail [The Economist] Robert Teitelman (The Deal) on new Stephen Bainbridge book Corporate Governance After the Financial Crisis [HuffPo] Securities suits: “trial lawyers probably won’t be able to defend a defective system forever” [WSJ Dealpolitik]
  • Uh-oh: U.K. Labour opposition looks at unleashing U.S.-style class actions [Guardian] “U.K. Moves ‘No Win, No Fee’ Litigation Reforms to 2013″ [Suzi Ring, Legal Week]
  • More on controls on cold medicines as anti-meth measure [Radley Balko, Megan McArdle, Xeni Jardin, earlier here, here, here]
  • Recognizable at a distance: “In Germany, a Limp Domestic Economy Stifled by Regulation” [NY Times]
  • Fewer lawyers in Congress these days [WSJ Law Blog]

{ 2 comments }

Merger announcements often trigger a spate of press releases announcing that securities plaintiff’s firms are “investigating” the situation. Even if the evidence of wrongdoing is absent and the financial analysis thin, lawsuits may be the next step, because that’s where the money is [David Nicklaus, St. Louis Post-Dispatch]

{ 1 comment }

February 8 roundup

by Walter Olson on February 8, 2012

  • Popular proposal to curb Congressional insider trading (“STOCK Act”) could have disturbing unintended consequences [John Berlau, CEI "Open Market"] A contrary view: Bainbridge.
  • Here’s Joe’s number, he’ll do a good job of suing us: “Some Maryland hospitals recommend lawyers to patients” [Baltimore Sun, Ron Miller]
  • Bribing the states to spend: follies of our fiscal federalism, and other themes from Michael Greve’s new book The Upside-Down Constitution [LLL, more, yet more] “Atlas Croaks, Supreme Court Shrugs” [Greve, Charleston Law Review; related, Ted Frank]
  • “… Daubert Relevancy is the Sentry That Guards Against the Tyranny of Experts” [David Oliver on new First Circuit opinion or scroll to Jan. 23]
  • Goodbye old political tweets, Eric Turkewitz is off to trial;
  • State laws squelch election speech, and political class shrugs (or secretly smiles) [George Will]
  • Too bad Carlyle Group got scared off promising experiment to revamp corporate governance to curb role of litigation [Ted Frank, Gordon Smith] AAJ should try harder to use people’s quotes in context [Bainbridge]

{ 3 comments }

February 6 roundup

by Walter Olson on February 6, 2012

  • “A 4-Page Playdate Waiver? Is This the New Normal?” [Lenore Skenazy, Free-Range Kids; our 2000 post on "Rise of the High-School Sleepover Disclaimer"]
  • Spirit Airlines sets what it calls DOTUC fee, for “Dept. of Transportation Unintended Consequences” [Stoll]
  • How fairly are fathers treated in family court? [Nina Shapiro, Seattle Weekly via Alkon]
  • “‘Insider’ Trading by the Representative Plaintiff in Shareholder Litigation” [Bainbridge]
  • “Donation controversy focuses attention on Madison County asbestos litigation” [St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Chamber-backed LNL]
  • Update: Appeals court reinstates Duluth doc’s defamation claims [DNT, earlier here, here, here; "bedside manner" criticism]
  • U.K.: “‘Psychic’ Sally Morgan Sues Critics for £150,000 After Refusing $1 Million to Prove Her Powers” [D.J. Grothe, HuffPo] “She’ll be calling witnesses such as ‘an uncle, or father, or a man… with a b in his first name’.” [@thegagthief]

{ 1 comment }

January 18 roundup

by Walter Olson on January 18, 2012

  • A federal fishing raid, the Pew Charitable Trusts and a biased Business Week account [Nils Stolpe on Gloucester, Mass. fisheries, via Stoll]
  • Intimidating the judiciary? “Group Opposing Citizens United Pushes ‘Occupy the Courts’ Protest” Jan. 20 [Debra Cassens Weiss, ABA Journal] Mob rallies at Michigan governor’s private home [Meegan Holland, MLive] “Occupy” forces Gingrich to cancel event [Daily Caller] Earlier here, here, here, etc.
  • “Paper Airplane? Late for School? Shouting Too Loud? You’re Under Arrest!” [Free-Range Kids, Texas]
  • Spielberg in “Raiders of the Lost Ark” paid homage to earlier movie sequences without sweating permissions. Oh, for those days [Joho] “Cultural gems that should be in the public domain today” [Atlantic Wire, Tabarrok]
  • UPS settlement exaggerates benefits to class members [Ted Frank; related, CCAF] “Federal Judges Have Harsh Words, Rulings for Class Action Plaintiffs’ Lawyers” [Lammi/WLF]
  • “Justice Breyer Calls Recusal Controversy a ‘Non-Issue’” [ABA Journal]
  • “Add Plaintiff-Lawyer Fees To The Cost Of Most Mergers” [Daniel Fisher, Forbes on Cornerstone Research report]

{ 1 comment }

Neither Stephen Bainbridge nor Larry Ribstein is particularly impressed by it.

{ 11 comments }

The suit was just a political stunt, writes Marc Hodak:

…Last week, the Delaware Chancery Court decided that in the absence of any substantiation whatsoever, and insisting on these things called facts, that they had to dismiss the case.

I only wish that the fiduciaries who brought this fact-challenged suit could be held accountable for the far more provable waste of their investors’ resources…

“Bernstein Leibhard has been chastised by a federal judge for revealing after six years of lawyering that the lead plaintiff in a securities case never bought the funds at issue.” [Mark Hamblett, New York Law Journal]

{ 2 comments }

Following murmurs about pay-to-play, South Carolina has turned down offers from local powerhouse Motley Rice and from Labaton Sucharow, whose attorneys had donated $12,000 to Attorney General Alan Wilson. [The State]

My new op-ed at the New York Post looks at the history of Spitzer-to-Cuomo-to-Eric Schneiderman prosecutorial overreach and asks: how exactly did the New York Attorney General come to have so much power with so little constraint? (& welcome Instapundit, Real Clear Markets, Timothy Carney/Examiner, CEI readers)

More: I and others have written about the act here and at Point of Law.

{ 1 comment }

The endless ramifications of Dodd-Frank: lawsuits following nonbinding shareholder resolutions on executive pay should be interpreted not as expressions of shareholder discontent but as moneymaking ventures by certain sectors of the bar, argues T.K. Kerstetter at Board Member (via Bainbridge

Cordray to CFPB

by Walter Olson on July 18, 2011

It appears President Obama “will nominate former Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray to be the first director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB),” according to my colleague Mark Calabria, who recounts Cordray’s mixed record on topics of business litigation (he withdrew an abusive lawsuit against lead-paint manufacturers, while also campaigning against foreclosures). Earlier coverage here.

P.S. Daniel Fisher at Forbes reports that securities class action lawyers appear to adore Cordray, to judge from his campaign finances. John Berlau finds him inclined toward heavy-handed regulation, while Neil Munro wonders about his data privacy defense record.

Dan Fisher notes a flurry of press releases from law firms following the decision by the board of directors of Lubrizol to accept an offer from Warren Buffett. “Never mind that the $148-a-share offer is a 41% premium to Friday’s closing price and 64% above its 1-year moving average of $90.” [Forbes]

{ 2 comments }

Daniel Fisher at Forbes explains:

…The rise of the “confidential witness” can be traced to the Public Securities Litigation Reform Act and subsequent Supreme Court rulings, under which class-action lawyers are required to do more than just point out the obvious, that a stock price fell. They need to state “particularized facts” giving a strong inference that somebody in management, not just a faceless corporate entity, did something he or she knew was fraudulent.

To get over this hurdle, class-action lawyers frequently call upon nameless “confidential witnesses” who apparently are willing to speak with plaintiff lawyers but live in fear of their identities being revealed to anyone else.

Funny thing is, the testimony of these confidential witnesses on eventually reaching the light of day keeps not backing up the propositions the lawyers said it did. The newest embarrassment afflicts Robbins Geller, a successor law firm to Bill Lerach’s Coughlin Stoia. More: ABA Journal; City of Livonia Employees Retirement System v. Boeing.

{ 1 comment }

Along with its formal report, the commission probing the financial crisis of 2008 has done an online archival dump of internal company documents that some hope, and others fear, will be of great help to litigators — even perhaps a “Wikileaks for the class action bar,” which with its allies was well represented on the commission and staff. [BLT; earlier]

More: David Frum has been doing a series of blog posts on the report’s substance.

{ 5 comments }

January 26 roundup

by Walter Olson on January 26, 2011

  • Cato Institute scholars liveblog reaction to State of the Union speech and GOP response, plus video on Facebook with Gene Healy and Julian Sanchez, more video;
  • Private store owners get beaten up for lack of ADA ramps. On the other hand, when the federal government is building courthouses… [Sun-Sentinel; earlier here and here]
  • “Securities suits filed in 2010 again a record” [Business Insurance]
  • Do mass tort “claims facilities” enable participants to bypass the strictures of legal ethics? [Monroe Freedman, Legal Ethics Forum]
  • Latest workplace-retaliation ruling once more undermines “pro-business Supreme Court” narrative [Bader, Examiner, more]
  • Jacob Sullum reviews Daniel Okrent book on Prohibition [Reason]
  • Another “lawyers excited about coming wave of bet-the-company climate change suits” article [AFP]
  • Dickie Scruggs: “It was never about the money for me, this litigation” [four years ago on Overlawyered]

{ 2 comments }

The National Law Journal headline puts it this way: “Two firms seek up to $6.5M for work on settlement yielding shareholders no monetary benefit.”

{ 1 comment }