Thanks to Purdue Pharma and other defendants in the multidistrict litigation that alleges the drug companies
For hedge funds specializing in appraisal litigation – in which shareholders refuse to tender their shares of a target company to the acquirer and instead ask a judge to set a fair value for their stake – there was good news and bad news in Tuesday’s extraordinary opinion from the Delaware Supreme Court in Verition Partners v. Aruba Networks.
At oral arguments Monday at the U.S. Supreme Court in Emulex v. Varjabedian, the big question was whether the justices will use the case to decide if private investors have a right to sue over allegedly misleading tender offer disclosures. Will the court consider the big issue? Or will the justices hew to the much narrower question of the proper pleading standard for shareholder claims?
When a lawyer wins appointment to lead a big, complex multidistrict litigation that will require thousands of hours of work from other lawyers at her firm, who owns that plum job: the lawyer or her firm?
Defense lawyers representing parents facing conspiracy, fraud and money-laundering charges in the ‘Varsity Blues’ college admissions scandal sent a remarkable letter Tuesday to U.S. District Judge Patti Saris of Boston, chief judge of the district where the parents will be tried.
For the second time in a week, the judge presiding over a securities class action has picked a new investor to take over a case in which the court-appointed lead plaintiff sought to withdraw for personal reasons. On Monday, U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg of San Francisco ruled that a previously passed-over candidate will now be in charge of a class action claiming that the backers of the $230 million Tezos cryptocurrency offering were selling unregistered securities, replacing a lead plaintiff whose social media posts might have created problems for the prospective class.
When I first read an announcement Monday from Burford Capital, I thought the tectonic plates of litigation finance had shifted.
U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson of Los Angeles ruled Tuesday that a group of Snap investors should serve as the lead plaintiff in a securities class action claiming the company failed to disclose discouraging user data in advance of its March 2017 IPO. The judge picked the coalition of five shareholders over two candidates with bigger losses, including the New Mexico State Investment Council. His ruling means that Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, which represents the newly appointed Snap investor group, will remain in charge of a case it has been litigating since May 2017.
Monday was a momentous day for appellate litigators, with amicus brief deadlines in two momentous cases: the U.S. Supreme Court's review of the Trump administration’s decision to add a question about citizenship to the 2020 census; and a 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals case in which Texas and other states, with the backing of the Justice Department, are defending a lower-court ruling that the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional. Twenty of the biggest law firms in the country signed amicus briefs in the census case, including Latham & Watkins, Goodwin Procter, Jenner & Block and Sidley Austin. A dozen, including K&L Gates, Dentons and Schiff Hardin, filed briefs in the ACA appeal.
If you’re a lawyer who represents whistleblowers with potential evidence of fraud against the United States, you should be fretting about a Justice Department motion filed Friday in a long-running False Claims Act suit against Gilead in federal court in San Francisco.