Home > Legal Library > Abstract




Join Matindale-Hubbell Connected


Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc.: The Court Retains Basic, But Permits Defendants To Rebut Price Impact At Class Certification



by Cadwalader Wickersham Taft LLP - New York Office

June 27, 2014

Previously published on June 25, 2014

On June 23, 2014, the Supreme Court issued its long anticipated decision in Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., No. 13-317, 2014 WL 2807181 (June 23, 2014). The Court declined to overturn the 25 year-old decision in Basic Inc. v. Levinson, 485 U.S. 224 (1988), which established the “fraud-on-the-market” presumption of reliance in Section 10(b) class actions, but resolved a conflict among the circuits by confirming that under Basic, defendants can challenge and defeat the presumption of reliance at the class certification stage. This article discusses the opinion with a focus on how defendants in practice can successfully rebut the fraud-on-the-market presumption.


 

The views expressed in this document are solely the views of the author and not Martindale-Hubbell. This document is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance.
 

View More Library Documents By...

 
Practice Area
 
Litigation
 
Cadwalader Wickersham Taft LLP Overview