Search for: "United States v. National Exchange Bank"
Results 81 - 100
of 744
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Nov 2022, 4:05 pm
Ct. 2090, 2099-2103, 195 L.Ed.2d 476 (2016); section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Morrison v. [read post]
23 Sep 2013, 12:50 pm
Eiten and National Financial Communications, Corp.Case number: 11-cv-12185 (United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts)Case filed: December 12, 2011Qualifying judgment/order: July 24, 2013 8/16/2013 11/14/2013 [read post]
23 Oct 2013, 3:27 pm
In United States v. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 10:14 am
(Morrison v. [read post]
15 Apr 2010, 6:09 am
National Australia Bank, (“NAB”) addressed the issue of “foreign-cubed” – or simply “f-cubed” – cases, because it involves plaintiffs from outside the United States, suing a firm whose headquarters and main operations are outside the United States, based on losses they incurred on securities exchanges outside the United States. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 11:49 am
National Australia Bank, the Court found that securities antifraud provisions applied to transactions in securities listed on domestic exchanges, and domestic transactions in other securities. [read post]
21 Jul 2010, 2:57 am
" In exploring what these phrases from the Morrison decision might mean, Judge Fischer said: One view of the Supreme Court’s holding is that if the purchaser or seller resides in the United States and completes a transaction on a foreign exchange from the United States, the purchase or sale has taken place in the United States. [read post]
19 Sep 2011, 3:00 am
The Court also dismissed the “foreign squared” claims — that is, claims by “investors who purchased their shares of UBS stock from within the United States” — i.e., claims from “a U.S. investor who places a buy order in the United States for a stock listed on a foreign exchange”, where, plaintiffs argued, the investor “completes his or her ‘purchase’ in the United States… [read post]
18 Nov 2008, 3:48 pm
The issue before the court in Morrison v National Australia Bank was whether to excercise subject matter jurisdiction over the foreign claimants who bought their NAB shares on a foreign exchange. [read post]
26 Apr 2012, 6:39 am
National Australia Bank, 130 S. [read post]
24 Jan 2012, 10:35 pm
National Australia Bank, upending decades of federal appeals court precedent in transnational securities law. [read post]
29 Sep 2020, 3:29 pm
National Australia Bank, in which the Court clarified that the U.S. securities laws applies only to securities transactions that take place in the United States, either on an exchange or otherwise. [read post]
22 Apr 2011, 9:31 am
NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK: EFFECTS AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES With the decision in Morrison v. [read post]
9 Jul 2010, 7:09 am
National Australia Bank, Dkt. [read post]
22 Feb 2011, 5:00 am
National Australia Bank, 130 S. [read post]
15 Jun 2012, 7:46 am
In United States v. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 11:47 am
National Australia Bank Ltd. held that the Exchange Act does not have any extraterritorial effect, O’Connor stressed. [read post]
21 Oct 2011, 5:00 am
Ill (August 4, 2011), the United States District Court granted Bank of America and LaSalle Bank’s (“Defendants”) motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 9:20 am
National Australia Bank case. [read post]
7 Jun 2019, 1:12 pm
Commerce Exchange Bank, 137 F.3d 885, 890 (6th Cir. 1998); see Grupo Dataflux v. [read post]
