Lorenzo v. SEC: the supreme court rules on scheme liability under the federal securities laws

Susan O Hurd, M. Gworek, Evan Glustrom
{"title":"Lorenzo v. SEC: the supreme court rules on scheme liability under the federal securities laws","authors":"Susan O Hurd, M. Gworek, Evan Glustrom","doi":"10.1108/JOIC-04-2019-0021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nTo analyze the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in Lorenzo v. SEC.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nDiscusses the lead up to the decision, the arguments made by both sides, and the opinion of the Court, and makes predictions about the likely impact of the decision.\n\n\nFindings\nThe holding is unlikely to have a significant impact on private securities litigation as shareholders, unlike the SEC, are required to prove reliance and, under the Lorenzo fact pattern, reliance cannot be shown.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nExpert analysis and guidance from experienced securities litigation counsel.\n","PeriodicalId":399186,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Investment Compliance","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Investment Compliance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JOIC-04-2019-0021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Purpose To analyze the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in Lorenzo v. SEC. Design/methodology/approach Discusses the lead up to the decision, the arguments made by both sides, and the opinion of the Court, and makes predictions about the likely impact of the decision. Findings The holding is unlikely to have a significant impact on private securities litigation as shareholders, unlike the SEC, are required to prove reliance and, under the Lorenzo fact pattern, reliance cannot be shown. Originality/value Expert analysis and guidance from experienced securities litigation counsel.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
洛伦佐诉美国证券交易委员会:联邦证券法下最高法院对计划责任的规定
目的分析最高法院在Lorenzo v. sec一案中判决的影响。设计/方法/途径讨论判决的原因、双方的论点和法院的意见,并对判决可能产生的影响做出预测。调查结果:持股不太可能对私人证券诉讼产生重大影响,因为与美国证券交易委员会不同,股东需要证明其可靠性,而在洛伦佐事实模式下,无法证明其可靠性。原创性/价值来自经验丰富的证券诉讼律师的专家分析和指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
ESG litigation – how companies can get ready, respond and resolve claims Strengthening AML/CFT controls of digital payment token service providers in Singapore Understanding regulatory trends: digital assets & anti-Money laundering “Racing” to the IBOR transition finish line Structuring and financing private equity and venture capital transactions in Luxembourg
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1