Search for: "C Janues"
Results 21 - 40
of 128
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Mar 2007, 1:04 am
Memorandum opinion by Judge Catherine C. [read post]
2 Oct 2018, 9:21 am
Circuit overturned the SEC's finding that Lorenzo violated Rule 10b-5(b), but upheld the remainder of the violations, noting that Rules 10b-5(a) and (c) and Securities Act Section 17(a)(1) do not speak in terms of an individual's "making" a false statement, which was the critical language construed in Janus. [read post]
6 Jan 2019, 7:31 am
SEC, which involves an attempt by the SEC to use a “scheme liability” theory under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act against an individual who did not “make” the misstatements at issue under Janus v. [read post]
1 Oct 2013, 8:07 am
Contents include:ArticlesRandle C. [read post]
16 Aug 2011, 10:31 am
UPDATE: Derek Lowe emails: Saw your mention of JAK (Janus Kinase) inhibitors, so I thought I’d send you an update from inside the drug industry. [read post]
28 Sep 2017, 6:53 pm
The Court agreed to hear an appeal in a case called Janus v. [read post]
27 Jun 2018, 3:12 pm
Most recently, in the Janus Funds case, the Court has said that only a “maker” of a misrepresentation can be held liable in a private securities lawsuit. [read post]
5 Nov 2018, 7:04 am
The Janus “maker” holding also will play an important role in the outcome of Lorenzo. [read post]
23 Dec 2018, 7:42 am
First Derivative Traders, [1] can nonetheless be held liable under the “fraudulent scheme” provisions of Rule 10b-5(a) and (c). [read post]
27 Dec 2019, 8:19 am
We're talking about the Roman god Janus. [read post]
25 Jul 2022, 3:34 am
” The Second Circuit reasoned that Janus would be undermined if scheme liability were expanded to encompass mere participation. [read post]
9 Jan 2015, 3:52 am
In so doing, it sought to limit the Supreme Court’s holding in Janus and offered an expansive view of Rule 10b-5(a) and (c). [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 6:08 am
Ct. 1094 (2019), in which the Court held that those who disseminate false or misleading statements with the intent to defraud—even if they are not the “maker” of the statement—can be found to have violated subsections (a) and (c) of Rule 10b-5 of the federal securities laws, often referred to as the “scheme liability” subsections of Rule 10b-5. [read post]
27 Jun 2018, 1:03 pm
This morning the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Janus v. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 9:30 pm
"From the Washington Post's "Made by History" section: Mary Ziegler (Florida State University College of Law) on "The Supreme Court's Big Abortion Hypocrisy"; Brian Rosenwald (Fox Leadership Program, University of Pennsylvania) on the implications of Justice Kennedy's retirement ("The Conservative Revolution"); KC Johnson (Brooklyn College/CUNY Graduate Center) on the same; Joseph Hower (Southwestern University) on how the Supreme Court's… [read post]
31 Mar 2017, 1:00 pm
Janus-Faced Law: A Philosophical DebateMartha C. [read post]
29 Nov 2010, 6:42 am
Janice C. [read post]
10 Jul 2019, 9:05 pm
Other courts held that a claim under subparts (a) or (c) of Rule 10b-5 could not circumvent Janus and must be based on conduct beyond misrepresentations or omissions actionable under Rule 10b-5(b). [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 5:51 am
Well, Justice Alito then simply asserts, as if night followed day, that "[c]ompelling a person to subsidize the speech of other private speakers raises similar First Amendment concerns" (emphasis added, and citing three modern cases, including Abood, that are no more explanatory than Janus). [read post]
22 Mar 2010, 8:30 am
David C. [read post]
