|
Publications
-
01.24.2023Washington Court Reaffirms Appraisal as Remedy for Shareholders Challenging a MergerUpdates
In an unpublished decision issued on January 3, 2023, Division I of the Washington Court of Appeals strongly reaffirmed Washington law providing that, absent a showing of fraudulent corporate conduct or certain procedural irregularities, appraisal is the exclusive remedy for a shareholder of a Washington corporation seeking to challenge a corporate merger transaction. Merely alleging breach of fiduciary duty or fraud in a complaint, unsupported by facts, is an insufficient basis to avoid the exclusive appraisal remedy under Washington law.
-
04.27.2018Ninth Circuit Establishes Negligence Standard for Section 14(e) Claims in Circuit-Splitting DecisionUpdatesRejecting the analysis of every other federal appellate court to consider the issue, the Ninth Circuit recently held that most claims filed under Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78n(e), do not require a showing of scienter.
-
11.02.2017Ninth Circuit Trims PSLRA Safe Harbor’s Protection for Forward-Looking StatementsUpdates
A recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit cut back on the protections afforded by the safe-harbor provision of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 for public companies whose forward-looking statements are alleged to be false or misleading.
-
11.2016The Stockholder's Extraordinary ContractLawyer Publications
King County Bar Association Bar Bulletin
-
12.30.2015Oregon Supreme Court Upholds Delaware Corporation’s “Exclusive-Forum” BylawUpdates
The Oregon Supreme Court unanimously held that a Delaware corporation’s “exclusive-forum” bylaw, which required that all litigation related to corporate governance be pursued exclusively in the Delaware Court of Chancery, was enforceable under both Delaware and Oregon law . . .
-
03.06.2013Supreme Court Holds Securities Fraud Class Certification Does Not Require Showing of Materiality, With Strong Dissents Questioning the Fraud-on-the-Market TheoryUpdatesIn its long-awaited decision in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans & Trust Funds, No. 11-1085 (U.S. Feb. 27, 2013), the U.S. Supreme Court held that plaintiffs in a securities-fraud class action do not need to establish the materiality of alleged misrepresentations in seeking class certification.
-
03.29.2012Supreme Court Rejects Ninth Circuit Rule on Tolling for Short-Swing Trading ClaimsUpdatesIn Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v. Simmonds, No. 10-1261, ___ U.S. ___, 2012 WL 986812 (Mar. 26, 2012), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Ninth Circuit's 30-year-old rule that tolls the statute of limitations for short-swing profit claims under Section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 until the insider discloses his transactions, typically in an SEC Form 4.
-
10.03.2011Thoughts on Pro Bono from Joe Bringman, KCBA PresidentLawyer Publications
Pro Bono Dicta
-
03.31.2011Supreme Court Addresses Materiality in Securities Fraud CasesUpdatesIn Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano, No. 09-1156 (U.S. Mar. 22, 2011), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that a plaintiff can establish the materiality (for purposes of claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5) of adverse events experienced by users of pharmaceutical products without showing that the incidence of harm from those adverse events was statistically significant.
-
2002 - 2003, 2010 - 2011Federal Civil Trial PracticeLawyer Publications
Washington Lawyers’ Practice Manual, Revised Edition
-
05.03.2010When Silence Is Not Consent: Supreme Court Says Sophisticated Business Parties Must Affirmatively Consent to Resolve Disputes Through Classwide ArbitrationUpdatesIn Stolt-Nielsen, S.A. v. AnimalFeeds International Corp., No. 08-1198 (U.S. Apr. 27, 2010), the U.S. Supreme Court placed a significant roadblock in the path of commercial parties who desire to use arbitration as a vehicle to obtain classwide relief.
-
05.17.2007Supreme Court to Address Scheme Liability TheoryUpdatesThe U.S. Supreme Court recently agreed to determine whether a legal theory known as “scheme liability” can be used to sue for securities fraud entities that, until now, have largely been protected from liability.
-
01.19.2006In the Penalty Box or Skating By? New Guidelines Shape SEC EnforcementUpdatesIn recent years the SEC has dramatically increased the size of civil penalties it seeks from companies accused of violating the federal securities laws. Critics questioned the SEC's lack of standards for determining such penalties and argued that the SEC's approach simply heaped additional punishment on the very same shareholders who were victimized by the company's violations.
-
10.14.2005A Neer Miss for CFOs and CEOs — Federal Court Finds No Private Right of Action Under Sarbanes-Oxley Section 304UpdatesIn the first case to directly address the question, a federal district court has held that private parties have no right to enforce Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Neer v. Pelino, No. 04-CV-04791-SD (E.D. Pa. Sept. 27, 2005). Instead, the court held that only the SEC can enforce Section 304.
-
09.13.2005Too Fine a Point? Court Dismisses SEC Regulation FD EnforcementUpdatesA judge in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York recently dismissed the SEC's first Regulation FD enforcement action to be tested in federal courts. In dismissing the action against Siebel Systems and two of its officers, the Court took the SEC to task for its overly aggressive enforcement of Regulation FD.
-
07.01.2005U.S. Supreme Court Reverses Criminal Conviction of Arthur Andersen in Enron ScandalUpdatesIn a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court recently reversed Arthur Andersen's criminal conviction for violating a federal witness tampering statute by encouraging its employees to shred Enron documents pursuant to a document retention policy. Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, 125 S. Ct. 2129, 2005 WL 1262915 (U.S. May 31, 2005). In doing so, the Supreme Court avoided direct evaluation of the conduct that led to the accounting firm's conviction.
-
04.22.2005Supreme Court Decision Should Help Discourage Abusive Securities Litigation Cases: Dura Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Broudo Rejects Ninth Circuit's Position on Loss Causation for Securities Fraud ClaimsUpdatesThe pattern is familiar. A public company makes some positive announcements about a product. After some time passes, the company announces bad news about the product, leading to a decline in the stock price.
-
01.19.2005Happy New Year? Recent Securities Litigation Settlements Highlight Increasing Risks to Corporate DirectorsUpdatesThe Sarbanes-Oxley Act and recent changes in Securities and Exchange Commission and stock exchange requirements have imposed ever greater responsibilities on corporate directors. As these additional responsibilities expose directors to increasing risks, companies have struggled to attract and retain qualified candidates to serve as independent directors.
