{"id":1474,"date":"2014-06-28T22:41:08","date_gmt":"2014-06-28T22:41:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.stockbrokerfraudblog.com\/2014\/06\/us_supreme_court_issues_ruling"},"modified":"2022-03-11T13:12:15","modified_gmt":"2022-03-11T19:12:15","slug":"us-supreme-court-issues-ruling","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/us-supreme-court-issues-ruling\/","title":{"rendered":"U.S. Supreme Court Issues Ruling in Halliburton Case Involving Fraud-On-The-Market Theory, Class Action Securities Cases"},"content":{"rendered":"

\t\t\t\tRuling in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund<\/em>, the U.S. Supreme Court has left the fraud-on-the-market theory intact. However, they may have made it easier for large companies to get the courts to throw out class action securities cases sooner. <\/p>\n

Halliburton Co. wanted to block a class action lawsuit <\/a>accusing the company of inflating its stock price. A number of investors are claiming that they lost money after the stock price fell following news that it misrepresented revenues, overstated a merger’s benefits, and understated its liability in asbestos litigation. <\/p>\n

Under the theory, securities fraud lawyers <\/a>can use stock prices as proof that a company took part in fraud without having to prove that investors depended on company statements (or omissions of statements) when making decisions. Many corporate lawyers had hoped that the court would get rid of the 1988 precedent it made when it ruled in Basic V. Levinson <\/em>more than 25 years ago. However, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the opinion for the justices that Halliburton didn’t offer any “special justification” for overruling the fraud-on-the-market presumption. (Justice Clarence Thomas, who ruled unanimously with the court, issued a separate opinion and was joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Antonin Scala. He said that Basic <\/em>should have been overruled.) <\/p>\n

Continue Reading \u203a<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Ruling in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund, the U.S. Supreme Court has left the fraud-on-the-market theory intact. However, they may have made it easier for large companies to get the courts to throw out class action securities cases sooner. Halliburton Co. wanted to block a class action lawsuit accusing the company of inflating its […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3804],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1474","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-class-action-lawsuits"],"yoast_head":"\nU.S. Supreme Court Issues Ruling in Halliburton Case Involving Fraud-On-The-Market Theory, Class Action Securities Cases — Investor Lawyers Blog — June 28, 2014<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Ruling in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund, the U.S. Supreme Court has left the fraud-on-the-market theory intact. However, they may have made it easier — June 28, 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/us-supreme-court-issues-ruling\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"U.S. Supreme Court Issues Ruling in Halliburton Case Involving Fraud-On-The-Market Theory, Class Action Securities Cases — Investor Lawyers Blog — June 28, 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"Ruling in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund, the U.S. Supreme Court has left the fraud-on-the-market theory intact. However, they may have made it easier — June 28, 2014\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"U.S. Supreme Court Issues Ruling in Halliburton Case Involving Fraud-On-The-Market Theory, Class Action Securities Cases — Investor Lawyers Blog — June 28, 2014","description":"Ruling in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund, the U.S. Supreme Court has left the fraud-on-the-market theory intact. However, they may have made it easier — June 28, 2014","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/us-supreme-court-issues-ruling\/","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"U.S. Supreme Court Issues Ruling in Halliburton Case Involving Fraud-On-The-Market Theory, Class Action Securities Cases — Investor Lawyers Blog — June 28, 2014","twitter_description":"Ruling in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund, the U.S. Supreme Court has left the fraud-on-the-market theory intact. However, they may have made it easier — June 28, 2014","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/us-supreme-court-issues-ruling\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/us-supreme-court-issues-ruling\/"},"author":{"name":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431"},"headline":"U.S. Supreme Court Issues Ruling in Halliburton Case Involving Fraud-On-The-Market Theory, Class Action Securities Cases","datePublished":"2014-06-28T22:41:08+00:00","dateModified":"2022-03-11T19:12:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/us-supreme-court-issues-ruling\/"},"wordCount":558,"articleSection":["Class Action Lawsuits"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/us-supreme-court-issues-ruling\/","url":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/us-supreme-court-issues-ruling\/","name":"U.S. Supreme Court Issues Ruling in Halliburton Case Involving Fraud-On-The-Market Theory, Class Action Securities Cases — Investor Lawyers Blog — June 28, 2014","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2014-06-28T22:41:08+00:00","dateModified":"2022-03-11T19:12:15+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431"},"description":"Ruling in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund, the U.S. Supreme Court has left the fraud-on-the-market theory intact. However, they may have made it easier — June 28, 2014","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/us-supreme-court-issues-ruling\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/us-supreme-court-issues-ruling\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/us-supreme-court-issues-ruling\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"U.S. Supreme Court Issues Ruling in Halliburton Case Involving Fraud-On-The-Market Theory, Class Action Securities Cases"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/","name":"Investor Lawyers Blog","description":"Published By Investment Fraud Attorneys \u2014 Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e0240e0754684b69f7d6a7de1b9f1431","name":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c7f8f04990816cd4044977eb59908da8c8d1ae487cc919cebd7027b74a0740a3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/"]}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pedX9K-nM","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1474","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1474"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1474\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24140,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1474\/revisions\/24140"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1474"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1474"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.investorlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1474"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}