Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to discuss the US Supreme Court's recently enunciated uniform test in Tellabs for determining whether factual allegations in a federal securities fraud complaint give rise to a “strong inference of scienter,” as required by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PSRLA).Design/methodology/approach – The paper discusses the way the decision steers a middle course among several recent circuit court approaches and redraws the semantic battle lines for future motions to dismiss securities‐fraud claims under §10(b) of the 1934 Act, but still leaves unresolved some embedded conceptual problems with the heightened pleading requirements under PSRLA.Findings – The findings of the study are that the Court's opinion embraces a robust new vocabulary, calling for “cogent” and “compelling” inferences that solidly hold their own against alternative explanations, but the Court refused to employ the PSLRA's particularily requirement as a screen to remove vague or ambigu...

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.