Inclusion of Inflated Purchase Price Does Not Doom Damages Calculation
District court finds expert’s damages calculation in securities case is not unreliable simply because it incorporates inflated purchase; expert also performed an event study and regression analysis to assess the effect of misrepresentation on inflated pri ...
Liberty Media Corp. v. Vivendi Universal, S.A.
In securities case, the federal court denies the defendants’ post-trial motion to upset the jury’s €765 million verdict, finding the plaintiffs’ expert’s loss causation and damages analysis was not defective; taking an “aggressively skeptical view” of the ...
In re Novatel Wireless Securities Litigation
District court finds expert’s damages calculation in securities case is not unreliable simply because it incorporates inflated purchase; expert also performed an event study and regression analysis to assess the effect of misrepresentation on inflated pri ...
Securities Fraud Also Requires ‘Precise’ Apportionment Analysis
: 11th Circuit confirms reversal of securities fraud violation by Florida-based bank, based on failure by the plaintiff’s financial expert to apportion the amount of stock losses between the alleged fraud and other market and industry risks, particularly ...
Dueling Experts Face Daubert in Valuing Oil and Gas Interests
Court denies “dueling” Daubert motion in securities fraud case concerning an oil and gas company, finding the experts on both sides relied on relevant facts and data and generally accepted methodology, including the comparable sales approach that used BLM ...
Goodwill Impairment: Liability Depends on Delay of Disclosures
Federal district court denies motion to dismiss securities claims, finding sufficient allegations that defendant company and CEO delayed timing of impairment charges to overstate value prior to a public offering.
Must Damages Experts Know the Applicable Law Before Taking a Case?
Court denies Daubert motion against plaintiffs’ expert, finding he applied the correct formula for calculating breach of contract damages for failing to register stock under Delaware law.
Holding Co. Value Must Include Subsidiary Debt
Under Delaware law, the board of directors for a holding company properly relied on consolidated financial statements and valuations of its subsidiary, including its subsidiary’s debt, to determine whether funds were “legally available” to redeem preferre ...
Hubbard v. BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc.
11th Circuit confirms reversal of securities fraud violation by Florida-based bank, based on failure by the plaintiff’s financial expert to apportion the amount of stock losses between the alleged fraud and other market and industry risks, particularly th ...
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission v. St. Anselm Exploration Co.
Court denies “dueling” Daubert motion in securities fraud case concerning an oil and gas company, finding the experts on both sides relied on relevant facts and data and generally accepted methodology, including the comparable sales approach that used BLM ...
Did Expert Apply the Right Formula for Failure to Register Stock?
Federal district court finds that plaintiff’s expert correctly applied formula (under applicable Delaware law) for the measure of damages when a defendant has breached a contract to register stock.
Stuckey v. Online Resources Corp. (II)
Court denies Daubert motion against plaintiffs’ expert, finding he applied the correct formula for calculating breach of contract damages for failing to register stock under Delaware law.
Brasher v. Broadwind Energy, Inc.
Federal district court denies motion to dismiss securities claims, finding sufficient allegations that defendant company and CEO delayed timing of impairment charges to overstate value prior to a public offering.
Expert’s Event Study ‘Flouts’ Commonly Accepted Methodology
District court strike’s expert event study, purporting to support a “fraud on the market theory,” for “flouting” accepted methodology, including “cherry-picking” the event dates and failing to account for confounding factors.
Stuckey v. Online Resources Corp. (I)
Federal district court finds that plaintiff’s expert correctly applied formula (under applicable Delaware law) for the measure of damages when a defendant has breached a contract to register stock.
Miller v. MSX-IBS Holding, Inc.
Under Delaware law, the board of directors for a holding company properly relied on consolidated financial statements and valuations of its subsidiary, including its subsidiary’s debt, to determine whether funds were “legally available” to redeem preferre ...
‘Level 3’ Valuations Are Not Shielded by Business Judgment Rule
Securities fraud claim survives motion to dismiss by alleging that municipal fund managers used Level 3 (unobservable) inputs to value highly risky derivative instead of the observable inputs (actual sales date), as promised in fund disclosures.
Shiftan v. Morgan Joseph Holdings, Inc.
In merger-related appraisal action Del. Chancery agrees with petitioning shareholders that fair value assessment of company as going concern must include the redemption value provided for in the original Certificate of Incorporation.
Bricklayers and Trowel Trades International Pension Fund v. Credit Suisse First Boston
District court strike’s expert event study, purporting to support a “fraud on the market theory,” for “flouting” accepted methodology, including “cherry-picking” the event dates and failing to account for confounding factors.
In re Oppenheimer Rochester Funds Group Securities Litigation
Securities fraud claim survives motion to dismiss by alleging that municipal fund managers used Level 3 (unobservable) inputs to value highly risky derivative instead of the observable inputs (actual sales date), as promised in fund disclosures.
Loss Causation Requires Valuation of Thinly Traded Bond on Purchase Date
Court dismisses securities fraud complaint regarding municipal bonds due to lack of expert loss causation evidence, i.e., comparing value of underlying collateral on purchase date to subsequent liquidation sale value.
Expert Challenged for Ignoring Rule 144 Discounts Under Daubert
Court declines to exclude expert’s value of shares in publicly traded company, finding the expert adequately considered Rule 144 “time and quantity” restrictions.
Securities Plaintiffs Need Expert to Prove FAS 157 Impairment Claims
Court finds that Morgan Stanley failed to disclose its subprime exposure and losses but dismisses complaint for lack of adequate allegations of loss causation, with leave to file amended claims.