The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit added a valuable point of clarity in securities cases dealing with material omissions this past week, even if Stadnick v. Vivint Solar, 16-65-cv, did little to change how most attorneys say they plan to approach the law.
“The defense bar and defendants will appreciate the clarification, because I think Shaw was always viewed as an outlier,” said Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe partner Robert Stern, referring to the First Circuit decision at the heart of the debate in Stadnick.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
