Robert L Hickok

September 22, 2009 | The Legal Intelligencer

In Luminent Mortgage Capital Inc. v. Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. and In re Nutrisystem Inc. Securities Litigation , two district courts recently applied the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in Institutional Investors Group v. Avaya Inc. to dismiss securities fraud complaints. In doing so, the district courts further clarified that the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act's scienter pleading requirement is a considerable obstacle to a securities fraud complaint surviving a motion to dismiss.

By Robert L. Hickok and Thomas T. Watkinson II

10 minute read

December 06, 2012 | The Legal Intelligencer

As reported by Cornerstone Research, Advisen and others, the frequency and volume of shareholder derivative and class action lawsuits challenging mergers and acquisitions of U.S. public companies have skyrocketed in recent years.

By Robert L. Hickok, Jay A. Dubow and Gay Parks Rainville

10 minute read

June 23, 2011 | The Legal Intelligencer

Since 2007, there have been two primary approaches for determining whether plaintiffs in securities fraud class actions can invoke, at the class certification stage.

By Robert L. Hickok, Gay Parks Rainville and Matthew D. Janssen

8 minute read

December 22, 2009 | The Legal Intelligencer

Do the antifraud provisions of the U.S. Securities Laws apply to "foreign-cubed" securities actions? This is the question before the U.S. Supreme Court in Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd. on certiorari from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

By Robert L. Hickok And Daniel J. Boland

10 minute read

March 24, 2009 | The Legal Intelligencer

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' recent decisions in In re Merck & Co. Inc. Securities, Derivative & ERISA Litigation and Alaska Electrical Pension Fund v. Pharmacia Corp., illustrate an unintended consequence of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act's, or PSLRA, heightened pleading requirements: an increase in the defendant's burden to show that a plaintiff's federal securities fraud claim is time

By Robert L. Hickok And Gay Parks Rainville

10 minute read

September 22, 2009 | The Legal Intelligencer

In Luminent Mortgage Capital Inc. v. Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. and In re Nutrisystem Inc. Securities Litigation , two district courts recently applied the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in Institutional Investors Group v. Avaya Inc. to dismiss securities fraud complaints. In doing so, the district courts further clarified that the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act's scienter pleading requirement is a considerable obstacle to a securities fraud complaint surviving a motion to dismiss.

By Robert L. Hickok and Thomas T. Watkinson II

10 minute read

September 22, 2009 | The Legal Intelligencer

In Luminent Mortgage Capital Inc. v. Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. and In re Nutrisystem Inc. Securities Litigation, two district courts recently applied the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in Institutional Investors Group v. Avaya Inc. to dismiss securities fraud complaints.

By Robert L. Hickok And Thomas T. Watkinson II

10 minute read

September 22, 2009 | The Legal Intelligencer

In Luminent Mortgage Capital Inc. v. Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. and In re Nutrisystem Inc. Securities Litigation , two district courts recently applied the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in Institutional Investors Group v. Avaya Inc. to dismiss securities fraud complaints. In doing so, the district courts further clarified that the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act's scienter pleading requirement is a considerable obstacle to a securities fraud complaint surviving a motion to dismiss.

By Robert L. Hickok and Thomas T. Watkinson II

10 minute read

March 25, 2010 | The Legal Intelligencer

On Jan. 29, following a three-month trial and three weeks of deliberations, the jury in In re Vivendi Universal found Vivendi liable for federal securities Rule 10b-5 violations based on 57 material misstatements by the company. Damages for the class could exceed $9 billion.

By Robert L. Hickok, Thomas T. Watkinson II and John L. Schweder II

9 minute read

October 04, 2010 | Texas Lawyer

The power of plaintiffs to negotiate favorable settlements in federal securities fraud actions depends to a significant extent on whether a district court certifies the action as a class action, say Robert L. Hickok and James G. McMillan. In its 2007 opinion in Oscar Private Equity Investments v. Allegiance Telecom Inc., the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sought to "tighten the requirements" for class certification to limit the ability of plaintiffs to put pressure on defendants to settle.

By Robert L. Hickok and James G. McMillan

10 minute read