« The First Amendment and securities fraud | Main | The Non-Uniformity of Uniform Laws »
Based on this report from the WSJ Law Blog, it seems that the question is, will the Court (1) stomp the corpse of aiding and abetting liability by ruling out any possibility of anything like scheme liability? or (2) deny liability in this case but throw some bone to the plaintiffs to resurrect some form of aiding and abetting liability in some future case with incredibly strong allegations?
I'm betting on 2.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c88c69e200e55040d49b8833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Stoneridge argument:
» More On Stonebridge, Scheme Liability And Shareholder Suits from DealBreaker.com
We’ve allowed our concern over the possible fate of shareholder proxy access rules to take a back seat over the last couple of days to our following the Stonebridge case. You know, the one about whether shareholders of one company... [Read More]
» Stoneridge Predictions from The 10b-5 Daily
Despite all of the fanfare leading up to the oral argument in the Stoneridge (a.k.a. Charter Communications) case on scheme liability, the aftermath has been quite subdued. That may be because the post-argument consensus (at least in the blogosphere) i... [Read More]
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Comments