October 9, 2007
Stoneridge Oral Argument
The transcript of the oral argument in Stoneridge Investors is posted at the Supreme Court website. There is very little in the questioning of the Justices that could give the petitioners any basis for encouragement. Chief Justice Roberts made it clear that the Court wasn't in the business of implying causes of action anymore and asked petitioners' attorney why the Court shouldn't be guided by what Congress's decision to create an aiding and abetting cause of action for the SEC only. Justice Alito said he saw absolutely no difference between the petitioners' theory and aiding and abetting. Justice Kennedy expressed concern that he saw no limitation on petitioners' theory, because there are any number of kickbacks and mismanagements and petty frauds that go on in business that affect stock prices. Only Justice Ginsberg, in her questioning of respondent's attorney, wanted to explore a possible third category between primary liability and the Central Bank facts.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Stoneridge Oral Argument:
» Stoneridge Predictions from The 10b-5 Daily
Despite all of the fanfare leading up to the oral argument in the Stoneridge (a.k.a. Charter Communications) case on scheme liability, the aftermath has been quite subdued. That may be because the post-argument consensus (at least in the blogosphere) i... [Read More]
Tracked on Oct 17, 2007 4:43:49 PM