139 S.Ct. 1094 (2019) 587 U.S. 2019 Francis V. LORENZO, Petitioner v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION. No. 17-1077.Supreme Court of United States. Argued December 3, 2018.Decided March 27, 2019. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. Robert Heim, New York, NY, for the petitioner. Christopher […]
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary […]
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary […]
131 S.Ct. 2179 (2011) 563 U.S. 804 180 L.Ed.2d 24 ERICA P. JOHN FUND, INC., fka Archdiocese of Milwaukee Supporting Fund, Inc., Petitioner, v. HALLIBURTON CO. et al. Supreme Court of United States. No. 09-1403. Argued April 25, 2011. Decided June 6, 2011. Headnotes SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 — Fraud Cause of Action — […]
131 S.Ct. 1309 (2011) 563 U.S. 27 MATRIXX INITIATIVES, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. James SIRACUSANO et al. Supreme Court of United States. No. 09-1156. Argued January 10, 2011. Decided March 22, 2011. Headnotes SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT?OF 1934 — Fraud Cause of Action — Failure to Disclose Possible Link Between Medication and Loss of Smell. […]
No. 16-373. 137 S.Ct. 2042 (2017) CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM, Petitioner v. ANZ SECURITIES, INC., et al. Supreme Court of United States. Argued April 17, 2017. Decided June 26, 2017. Counsel: Thomas C. Goldstein, Bethesda MD, for petitioner. Paul D. Clement, Washington, DC, for respondents. Darren J. Robbins,?Joseph D. Daley,?Thomas E. Egler, Robbins Geller […]
NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See […]
NOTE:?Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.See United States v. Detroit […]
131 S.Ct. 2296 JANUS CAPITAL GROUP, INC., ET AL., PETITIONERS v. FIRST DERIVATIVE TRADERS. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No. 09-525. Argued December 7, 2010. Decided June 13, 2011. Headnotes: Securities Law — Private right of action — False statements in mutual fund prospectuses. Petitioners […]
377 U.S. 426 377 U.S. 426 84 S.Ct. 1555 12 L.Ed.2d 423 J. I. CASE COMPANY et al., Petitioners,v.Carl H. BORAK, etc. No. 402. Argued April 22 and 23, 1964. Decided June 8, 1964. Walter S. Davis and Malcolm K. Whyte, Milwaukee, Wis., for petitioners. Alex Elson, Arnold I. Shure, Willard J. Lassers and Aaron […]
346 U.S. 119 73 S.Ct. 981 97 L.Ed. 1494 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. RALSTON PURINA CO. No. 512. Argued April 28, 1953. Decided June 8, 1953. Counsel: Mr. Roger S. Foster, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Mr. Thomas S. McPheeters, St. Louis, Mo., for respondent. [hr] Syllabus Without complying with the registration requirements of the […]
[qtbl stle=”color:gray;”] Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Manning, 578 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held, 8?0, that the jurisdictional test established by ?27 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is the same as 28 USC ?1331’s test for deciding if a case […]
426 U.S. 438 96 S.Ct. 2126 48 L.Ed.2d 757 TSC INDUSTRIES, INC., et al., Petitioners,v.NORTHWAY, INC. No. 74-1471. Argued March 3, 1976. Decided June 14, 1976. Syllabus Rule 14a-9, promulgated under ? 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, provides that no proxy solicitation shall be made “which . . . is false or […]
485 U.S. 224 108 S.Ct. 978 99 L.Ed.2d 194 BASIC INCORPORATED, et al., Petitioners, v. Max L. LEVINSON, et al. No. 86-279. Argued Nov. 2, 1987. Decided March 7, 1988. Syllabus The Securities and Exchange Commission’s Rule 10b-5, promulgated under ? 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Act), prohibits, in connection with the […]
471 U.S. 681 105 S.Ct. 2297 85 L.Ed.2d 692 LANDRETH TIMBER COMPANY, Petitioner v. Ivan K. LANDRETH et al. No. 83-1961. Argued March 26, 1985. Decided May 28, 1985. Syllabus Respondents father and sons, who owned all of the common stock of a lumber business that they operated, offered their stock for sale through brokers. […]
501 U.S. 1083 501 U.S. 1083 111 S.Ct. 2749 115 L.Ed.2d 929 VIRGINIA BANKSHARES, INC., et al., Petitionersv.Doris I. SANDBERG et al. No. 89-1448. Argued Oct. 9, 1990. Decided June 27, 1991. Syllabus As part of a proposed “freeze-out” merger, in which First American Bank of Virginia (Bank) would be merged into petitioner Virginia Bankshares, […]