Morrison Foerster is an international law firm with lawyers practicing throughout the United States, Asia, and Europe. Click to discover more.

mofo_share_image.jpg

Morrison Foerster

favicon.ico

favicon-16x16.png

favicon-32x32.png

apple-touch-icon.png

MoFo Favicons

Terms / Notices

Cookies

Privacy Policy

Attorney Advertising

Secure Login

Alumni

  Facebook

MoFo Facebook

  Linkedin

MoFo LinkedIN

Twitter

MoFo Twitter

YouTube

MoFo Youtube

Morrison Foerster - Footer

You have not solved the recaptcha challenge yet or session expired, try again.

Disclaimer

Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our <a href="https://www.mofo.com/about/privacy-policy.html">Privacy Policy</a>, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.

Feedback

mofo-logo-2022.svg

People

Capabilities

Resources

About

Culture

Offices

Careers

Stay Connected

James Beha and Jocelyn Greer authored an article for the Wall Street Lawyer discussing The Supreme Court’s decision in Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, where the Court confirms that the district courts must

The Supreme Court's Decision in Goldman Sachs Confirms Courts Must Consider All Relevant "Price Impact" Evidence When Addressing Class Certification in Federal Securities Fraud Class Actions

About Morrison Forester

people-default-header-desktop.jpg

people-default-header-mobile.jpg

Default Meta Data

James Beha and Jocelyn Greer authored an article for the Wall Street Lawyer discussing The Supreme Court’s decision in Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, where the Court confirms that the district courts must consider all relevant “price impact” evidence when addressing the class certification stage in federal securities fraud class actions.“The ‘price impact’ analysis in a federal securities fraud action considers whether a defendant’s alleged misrepresentation actually affected the company’s stock price, as required to support a presumption of reliance under the ‘fraud-on-the-market’ theory,” the authors wrote. “A recent line of Supreme Court decisions permits a securities fraud defendant to defeat class certification by demonstrating the lack of price impact. But those decisions left some uncertainty about the type of evidence a defendant could present to make that showing. In Goldman Sachs, the Court confirmed that, when deciding class certification in a securities fraud case, ‘[t]he district court’s task is simply to assess all the evidence of price impact . . . and determine whether it is more likely than not that the alleged misrepresentations had a price impact.’” Read the <a href="https://media2.mofo.com/v3/assets/blt5775cc69c999c255/bltfa8175ea94767214/6273efb923c6cf2a1c3b0e84/210802-federal-securities-fraud-class-actions.pdf" target="_blank">full article</a>

The Supreme Court's Decision in Goldman Sachs Confirms Courts Must Consider All Relevant "Price Impact" Evidence When Addressing Class Certification in Federal Securities Fraud Class Actions