Editor's Note :

Editor's Note :

There is a possibility of opinions on Tuesday, March 28 and Wednesday, March 29. We will begin live-blogging at this link at 9:45 a.m.
On Tuesday the court hears oral argument in Lee v. United States. Amy Howe has our preview.

Proskauer Rose LLP v. Troice

Linked with:

Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
12-88 5th Cir. Oct 7, 2013
Tr.Aud.
Feb 26, 2014 7-2 Breyer OT 2013
 
Share:

Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, serves as counsel to the respondents in this case.

Holding: The Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1988 does not preclude the plaintiffs' state-law class actions contending that the defendants assisted in perpetrating a Ponzi scheme by falsely representing that uncovered securities that plaintiffs were purchasing were backed by covered securities.

Plain English Summary:

Judgment: Affirmed, 7-2, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on February 26, 2014. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion. Justice Kennedy filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Alito joined.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

Briefs and Documents

Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, serves as counsel to the respondents in this case.   Issue: (1) Whether the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (“SLUSA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 77p(b), 78bb(f)(1), prohibits private class actions based on state law only where the alleged purchase or sale of a covered security is “more than tangentially related” to the “heart, crux or gravamen” of the alleged fraud; and (2) whether the SLUSA precludes a class action in which the defendant is sued for aiding and abetting fraud, but a non-party, rather than the defendant, made the only alleged misrepresentation in connection with a covered securities transaction.
Term Snapshot
Awards