8 Min Read
(Reuters) - Goldman Sachs informed the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday that the court’s 2014 ruling in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund has been, well, a flop.
But the bank told the justices they can change that! What the Supreme Court needs to do, Goldman’s lawyers at
Paul, Weiss, Rifkin, Wharton & Garrison argued in the bank’s opening brief in Goldman Sachs v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, is remind lower courts just how much leeway defendants are supposed to have in opposing shareholder fraud class actions.
In the 2014 decision, as you surely remember, the Supreme Court left intact the structural premise of securities class actions, in which shareholders are entitled to a presumption of reliance on defendants’ alleged misrepresentations as long as they can show the company’s shares traded in an efficient market. (That premise, in turn, is based on the idea that in an efficient market, the share price reflects all public information.)