Supreme Court seeks Nairo Path in investors’ lawsuit against Goldman Sachs

A divided three-judge panel of the Court of Appeal held that relies on an inference made by the 1988 Supreme Court decision, Original v. LewinsonSays that investors claimed that they had been defrauded by making false statements in securities filings. Instead, he said, they can rely on an assumption that all publicly available information about a company is reflected in its share price.

The theory allowed investors to skip the necessary step in a simple fraudulent suit: direct evidence that they relied on the competition statement. This allowed investors to avoid the need for class actions: proof that it was common enough to allow their claims to be closed simultaneously.

Sopan Joshi, a lawyer for the federal government, said it is possible that the general statements in Monday’s case could be quite meaningful, an argument that was reiterated in a brief filed by pension funds and their supporters.

“Goldman Sachs was operating with a lot of financial instruments in which the confrontation was extremely important, both to the company” and “to the prestigious advantage that it enjoyed more than its rivals and peers, and the industry generally,” he said. said. “In this case, even highly generalized statements about conflicts have, in fact, caused a price impact.”

Mr Joshi, who did not argue in support of both sides, said the government had not taken a position on whether the analysis was correct, and urged the appeal to direct the appeals court to address it.

Although all three attorneys agreed that the courts could consider whether the generic statements affected stock prices, they differ in this case, Goldman Sachs Group v. Arkansas Teachers Retirement System, No. 20 -222.

Goldman’s lawyer, Mr. Shanmugam, said that the court should reverse the decision of the appeal ruling the court; Mr Goldstein, an advocate for pension funds, said the judiciary should ratify the decision; And the public prosecutor, Mr. Joshi, said that the court should vacate the decision of the appeals court and instruct it to reconsider the case.

Source link

Popular Topics

Related Articles

Translate ยป