In June, the Supreme Court rendered its long-awaited decision in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund that had the potential to end securities class action litigation as it has been practiced for the last 30 years.
Instead, the court essentially maintained the status quo, but altered the litigation landscape in a potentially, but not necessarily, significant manner by allowing defendants to rebut at the class certification stage the presumption of reliance embraced 26 years ago in Basic v. Levinson, 485 U.S. 224 (1988).
The ‘Basic’ Presumption of Reliance
This content has been archived.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]
