The Supreme Court continues to be interested in securities fraud cases with three cases on its docket. The Court recently took certiorari in Halliburton, a Fifth Circuit case applying (and expanding) that circuit’s rule by holding plaintiffs must prove loss causation by a preponderance of the evidence at the class certification stage. Erica P. John Fund, Inc. fka Archdiocese of Milwaukee Supporting Fund Inc. v. Halliburton Co.1 The Court also recently heard argument in Matrixx Initiatives, Inc., et al. v. Siracusano, a Ninth Circuit case raising the question of whether a securities fraud complaint can survive dismissal where it alleges that a drug company failed to disclose adverse incident reports concerning a drug without alleging a “statistically significant” number of such incidents.2
And, the third case, Janus Capital Group, Inc. et al. v. First Derivative Traders,3 also recently argued, addresses the scope of primary liability in a case seeking to hold the investment advisor of Janus Funds liable for “making” false statements in prospectuses issued by the Funds. While securities lawyers are always expectant that the Supreme Court can clarify and give guidance on some less than clear legal precepts governing their daily practices, it appears unlikely that each case will result in major new pronouncements from the Court.
‘Halliburton’
