On April 17, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear argument in Slack Technologies, LLC v. Pirani, a case that seemingly deals with a technical issue of standing under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, but which could render that provision largely irrelevant. Along with my Columbia law colleague, Professor Joshua Mitts, I have co-authored an amicus brief in this case that takes a position roughly midway between the two sides.

This column will assess both the implications of Slack and the predictable attempts by issuers and underwriters to downsize Section 11 further by manipulating its tracing requirements.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]