Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 05 MARCH 2013

Supreme Court Holds That Securities Fraud Plaintiffs Need Not Show Materiality At Class Certification

Mayer Brown
Mayer Brown
Contributor
Mayer Brown

Mayer Brown

Mayer Brown is a leading international law firm positioned to represent the world’s major...

View firm profile
Explore more from Mayer Brown

Today, in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds, No. 11-1085, the Supreme Court held that proof of materiality is not a prerequisite for class certification in a securities fraud class action under Section 10(b), even though materiality is a predicate of the fraud-on-the-market presumption of reliance.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Keywords: Amgen v. Conn. Retirement Plans, securities, Supreme Court

Today, in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds, No. 11-1085, the Supreme Court held that proof of materiality is not a prerequisite for class certification in a securities fraud class action under Section 10(b), even though materiality is a predicate of the fraud-on-the-market presumption of reliance.  The opinion for the majority of the Court was authored by Justice Ginsburg.  Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy dissented.  Justice Alito wrote a concurring opinion indicating that, in an appropriate case, he (like the three dissenting justices) would be open to reconsidering the fraud-on-the-market presumption. For more, see our report on the decision. (See also our report and article on the argument.)

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from