Search for: "Securities Co. v. United States" Results 61 - 80 of 3,905
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Aug 2017, 7:00 am by Sarah Grant
In a money-saving shift for the court, the open sessions were not transmitted by secure video to stateside locations. [read post]
4 Dec 2010, 5:00 am by Tracy Taylor
  First, the defendants questioned whether the securities fraud claims of the putative class in the case, including purchasers of securities on a French stock exchange, remained viable after the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. [read post]
28 Aug 2008, 8:45 pm
The MBTA sued the students and MIT in United States District Court in Massachusetts. [read post]
22 Feb 2011, 8:00 am by J Robert Brown Jr.
  Under this line of reasoning, anyone selling foreign securities in the United States and closing the transaction in the United States could escape application of the antifraud provisions. [read post]
" Instead, the Second Circuit held that courts must carefully consider the facts and circumstances of each case to avoid the very result that the Supreme Court had hoped to prevent in Morrison: promiscuous application of the U.S. securities laws to transactions that have little, if any, relationship to the United States. [read post]
2 Apr 2007, 3:00 am
The New York Court of Appeals recently answered the following question certified from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Rosenberg v. [read post]
31 Jan 2015, 6:03 am
(Opinion  on Petition For Rehearing, United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, 14-3983,09-4414-cv, January 30, 2015). [read post]
15 Jul 2011, 6:00 am by Trevor Cutaiar
Pool Offshore, Inc., 182 F.2d 353 (5th Cir. 1999) was still good law in light of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Stewart v. [read post]