Help

BI’s Article search uses Boolean search capabilities. If you are not familiar with these principles, here are some quick tips.

To search specifically for more than one word, put the search term in quotation marks. For example, “workers compensation”. This will limit your search to that combination of words.

To search for a combination of terms, use quotations and the & symbol. For example, “hurricane” & “loss”.

Login Register Subscribe

Future of derivative suits hangs on high court ruling

Reprints

The appeal of filing derivative shareholder lawsuits in the future could hinge on the U.S. Supreme Court's eventual ruling in a class action case, observers say.

Halliburton Co. and David Lesar v. Erica P. John Fund Inc., FKA Archdiocese of Milwaukee Supporting Fund Inc. deals with the issue of how easily plaintiffs can obtain class action certification in cases in which they allege firms have misrepresented information to their detriment as investors. Arguments in the case are scheduled for March 5.

The focus of the case is the Supreme Court's 1988 ruling in Basic Inc. v. Max Levinson, in which the court endorsed the “fraud on the market presumption theory.”

The theory says plaintiffs in class actions do not have to demonstrate that each of the individual class members relied on the company's alleged misrepresentation of information.

It is based on the presumption that in an efficient marketplace, a company's share price reacts to all publicly available information about the company.

Experts say the Basic ruling has made it much easier for plaintiffs to file class action lawsuits.

“If the Supreme Court rules to overturn Basic vs. Levinson in that case, we'll unquestionably see a spike in derivative lawsuits after that,” said Will Fahey, New York-based senior vice president in Zurich North America's management liability group.

Read Next