Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Willamette gives insights into shareholder litigation

The Spring 2019 Insights from Willamette Management Associates focuses on shareholder litigation and is edited by Kevin M. Zanni.

In re Finisar Corp. Secs. Litig.

Court denies class certification in securities fraud case, finding defense financial expert is able to rebut presumption of reliance by way of event study that shows defendant’s alleged misrepresentation had no significant impact on company’s stock price.

Defense Event Study Rebuts Plaintiff’s Price Impact Claim

Court denies class certification in securities fraud case, finding defense financial expert is able to rebut presumption of reliance by way of event study that shows defendant’s alleged misrepresentation had no significant impact on company’s stock price.

Baker v. Seaworld Entm’t, Inc.

Court grants class certification in securities fraud case; defense expert’s event study to show absence-of-price-impact fails to rebut presumption of reliance; plaintiff meets predominance requirement and its expert offers valid classwide damages model.

Court Balks at Event Study’s Singular Focus on Misrepresentation

Court grants class certification in securities fraud case; defense expert’s event study to show absence-of-price-impact fails to rebut presumption of reliance; plaintiff meets predominance requirement and its expert offers valid classwide damages model.

Direct Evidence of Price Impact Not Always Necessary, 2nd Circuit Says

In a securities fraud action, appeals court upholds class certification; trial court did not err when it found direct evidence of price impact by way of event study was not necessary to show market efficiency where there was strong indirect evidence.

Waggoner v. Barclays PLC

In a securities fraud action, appeals court upholds class certification; trial court did not err when it found direct evidence of price impact by way of event study was not necessary to show market efficiency where there was strong indirect evidence.

Expert’s Damages Opinion Specific Enough for Class Certification Stage

In a securities case, court applies Daubert analysis to plaintiff expert’s market efficiency opinion and event study; expert is qualified even without academic background, and his damages opinion is sufficiently specific to facts of the case and reliable.

SEC’s Daubert Challenge to Securities Valuation Testimony Fizzles

In an SEC case requiring valuation of restricted securities, court admits most of the testimony of parties’ experts; experts need not be specialists in given field and need not demonstrate familiarity with USPAP or SSVS to qualify under Daubert, court fin ...

SEC’s Daubert Challenge to Securities Valuation Testimony Fizzles

In an SEC case requiring valuation of restricted securities, court admits most of the testimony of parties’ experts; experts need not be specialists in given field and need not demonstrate familiarity with USPAP or SSVS to qualify under Daubert, court fin ...

SEC v. Nutmeg Group, LLC

In an SEC case requiring valuation of restricted securities, court admits most of the testimony of parties’ experts; experts need not be specialists in given field and need not demonstrate familiarity with USPAP or SSVS to qualify under Daubert, court fin ...

Expert’s Damages Opinion Specific Enough for Class Certification Stage

In a securities case, court applies Daubert analysis to plaintiff expert’s market efficiency opinion and event study; expert is qualified even without academic background, and his damages opinion is sufficiently specific to facts of the case and reliable.

Willis v. Big Lots, Inc.

In a securities case, court applies Daubert analysis to plaintiff expert’s market efficiency opinion and event study; expert is qualified even without academic background, and his damages opinion is sufficiently specific to facts of the case and reliable.

High Court Dissent Rebukes Chancery’s Analysis in Option Valuation Case

In medical company valuation case, high court affirms award to option holders based on deference owed to trial court’s findings of historical fact; dissent says Chancery’s dismissal ...

Is Expert Opinion Based Solely on Experience Admissible?

Court rules expert testimony based solely on experience may be admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, notwithstanding Daubert requirements.

2nd Circuit Chafes at Wholesale Exclusion of Loss Causation Testimony

Second Circuit says district court “went astray” when, under Daubert, it excluded entire loss causation and damages testimony of plaintiffs’ expert instead of just eliminating unreliable part; appeals court ruling revives securities fraud class action.

Is Expert Opinion Based Solely on Experience Admissible?

Court rules expert testimony based solely on experience may be admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, notwithstanding Daubert requirements.

Broyles v. Cantor Fitzgerald & Co.

Court rules expert testimony based solely on experience may be admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, notwithstanding Daubert requirements.

Cdx Holdings, Inc. v. Fox (Fox II)

In medical company valuation case, high court affirms award to option holders based on deference owed to trial court’s findings of historical fact; dissent says Chancery’s dismissal of board members’ valuation testimony evinces Chancery’s hindsight bias.

High Court Dissent Rebukes Chancery’s Analysis in Option Valuation Case

In medical company valuation case, high court affirms award to option holders based on deference owed to trial court’s findings of historical fact; dissent says Chancery’s dismissal ...

Wholesale exclusion of expert testimony contravenes Daubert, 2nd Circuit says

One error in an extensive economic analysis does not automatically call into question the entire expert opinion, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals recently said in the context of a securities fraud lawsuit involving the drug giant Pfizer. With this pronouncement the appeals court resuscitated a class action that had died after the district court excluded the plaintiffs' loss causation and damages expert under Daubert based on errors in the expert's event study. Deprived of the testimony, the plaintiffs were unable to prove two critical elements of their claim.

Showers v. Pfizer, Inc. (In re Pfizer Inc. Sec. Litig.)

Second Circuit says district court “went astray” when, under Daubert, it excluded entire loss causation and damages testimony of plaintiffs’ expert instead of just eliminating unreliable part; appeals court ruling revives securities fraud class action.

7th Circuit Proposes Solution for Loss Causation Conundrum

7th Circuit agrees with defendants that plaintiff expert’s leakage loss-causation model failed to account for firm-specific, nonfraud factors that could have affected stock price movement and orders new trial applying court’s burden-shifting approach.

Chancery Decries Accounting Firm’s Compromised Valuation

Chancery says major accounting firm’s merger-related appraisal represents “new low”; to achieve client’s goal of zero corporate tax liability, firm abandoned sound prior approaches and simply copied another accounting firm’s report and called it its own.

1 - 25 of 137 results