VIEW TREE
ICON KEY
235:false:false:false:false:false:false:true:false:false:!:false:-1:-1
Jurisdiction over Rule 10b-5 claims.
Add Comment
Contributed in 2008 & last edited in 2009 by David Gold
Browse from No defense to claim for damages
Law
»
Commerce, labor, particular activities & industries
»
Securities
»
Liability & enforcement
»
Fraud claims
»
SEC Rule 10b-5
»
Procedure
»
District court
»
Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over Rule...
Narrow Down
Contribution Suggestions
complete authority for rule...
Whether a misstatement or omission as to the existence of merger negotiations is material for purposes of a Rule 10b-5 claim depends on the stage...See Kronfeld v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 832 F.2d 726, pin? (2d Cir. 1987).
in support of
Whether a misstatement or omission as to the existence of merger negotiations is material for purposes of a Rule 10b-5 claim depends on the stage of the negotiations.vouch for authority for rule...
Conduct within the United States may be the basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction over a Rule 10b-5 claim.Butte Mining PLC v. Smith, 76 F.3d 287, 290 (9th Cir. 1996).
in support of
Conduct within the United States may be the basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction over a Rule 10b-5 claim.complete authority for rule...
A statement by the defendant that is reasonably calculated to affect the investment decision of a reasonable investor satisfies the "connection"...SEC v. Savoy Industries, Inc., 587 F.2d 1149, 1171 (D.C. Cir. 1978).
in support of
A statement by the defendant that is reasonably calculated to affect the investment decision of a reasonable investor satisfies the "connection" requirement of a Rule 10b-5 claim, regardless whether the defendant bought or sold the security.