Petitions of the day
The petitions of the day are:
Chadbourne & Parke LLP v. Troice (Granted )
Note: 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.
Docket: 12-79
Issue(s): (1) Whether the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA) precludes a state-law class action alleging a scheme of fraud that involves misrepresentations about transactions in SLUSA-covered securities; and (2) whether SLUSA precludes class actions asserting that defendants aided and abetted SLUSA-covered securities fraud when the defendants themselves did not make misrepresentations about the purchase or sale of SLUSA-covered securities.
Certiorari stage documents:
Willis of Colorado Inc. v. Troice (Granted )
Note: 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.
Docket: 12-86
Issue(s): Whether a covered state law class action complaint that unquestionably alleges “a” misrepresentation “in connection with” the purchase or sale of a security covered by the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act nonetheless can escape the application of SLUSA by including other allegations that are farther removed from a covered securities transaction.
Certiorari stage documents:
- Opinion below (5th Cir.)
- Petition for certiorari
- Brief of respondents James Roland et al. and Leah Farr et al. in opposition
- Brief of respondents Samuel Troice et al. in opposition
- Motion for leave to file amicus brief and amicus brief of Brazeale, Sachse & Wilson, LLP
- Motion for leave to file amicus brief and amicus brief of DRI - The Voice of the Defense Bar
- Reply of petitioner
Proskauer Rose LLP v. Troice (Granted )
Note: 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.
Docket: 12-88
Issue(s): (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.
Certiorari stage documents:
Recommended Citation: Ben Cheng, Petitions of the day, SCOTUSblog (Sep. 14, 2012, 11:23 PM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2012/09/petition-of-the-day-335/