Website Heading

CALIFORNIA CORPORATE & SECURITIES LAW

Is Certiorari A Possibility For SLUSA Question Not Addressed By Any Federal Circuit Court?

In Luther v. Countrywide Financial Corp., 195 Cal. App. 4th 789 (2011), the trial court ruled that state courts do not enjoy concurrent jurisdiction when a class action meeting the definition of a “covered class action” under the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (aka “SLUSA”) did not involve a “covered security”, as also…

Share on:

Section 11 Class Actions And The Magna Carta

If you had a dispute in Medieval England, it would likely be heard in the court of the local baron.  Some disputes, however, caught the interest of the monarch and would be heard in a royal court.  In the twelfth century, King Henry II instituted royal justice throughout England.  As might be expected, controversies arose…

Share on:

How Chadbourne & Parke, LLC v. Troice Threatens The Defense Of The Guilty And The Innocent

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Chadbourne & Parke, LLC v. Troice, 571 U.S. ___ (2014) arose out of the a multibillion dollar Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Allen Stanford.  The scheme involved the sale to investors of certificates of deposit in Stanford International Bank.  Mr. Stanford was convicted of mail fraud, wire fraud, conspiracy to commit money laundering, and…

Share on:

Concurrent Jurisdiction Found For Covered Class Actions

In 1997, I testified at an oversight hearing before the United States Senate Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs Committee regarding securities litigation abuses.  At the time, Congress was considering whether to enact legislation to stop plaintiffs from filing securities class actions in state court in order to avoid stricter federal standards applicable to class action lawsuits.  Both…

Share on: