FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W761014712> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W761014712 startingPage "455" @default.
• W761014712 abstract "IN AN EFFORT to protect corporations from abusive litigation, Congress passed the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (Reform Act or PSLRA) in 1995, which made federal securities fraud class actions harder to maintain on a variety of fronts. One unforeseen consequence of the act was an increase in the filings of securities fraud actions in state courts, where plaintiffs could avoid the new, tougher federal standards. In 1998, Congress attempted to close this loophole with the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA), which pre-empts under the federal Constitution's supremacy clause certain state law securities fraud class actions. SLUSA's effect is now being revealed. One noticeable trend has been the rise of so-called claims--that is, claims brought by non-transacting shareholders claiming damage because corporate misrepresentations induced them to hold their stock. Because the federal courts have held that these claims fall outside SLUSA's preemptive scope, they have become an attractive alternative for plaintiffs' lawyers. Although state holding claims have the potential to undermine the goals of the 1995 Reform Act, they rightly remain within the purview of state court jurisdiction, and Congress should not wield its pre-emption power in this arena. 1995 REFORM ACT 1995 Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (1) was passed after intense lobbying efforts persuaded Congress to take action to curb securities fraud suits, meritless suits brought by class action plaintiffs' lawyers to extort settlement and attorneys' fees. (2) joint explanatory. statement of the conference committee stated, The private securities litigation system is too important to the integrity of American capital markets to allow this system to be undermined by those who seek to line their own pockets by bringing abusive and meritless suits. (3) Reform Act responded to these perceived abuses by creating certain procedural barriers that make it more difficult to sustain securities fraud class actions in federal court. It heightened pleading standards required to state a private federal securities fraud claim, for instance, by raising the standard for pleading scienter, and it imposed a discovery stay during the pendency of a motion to dismiss, thus preventing plaintiffs from using discovery to satisfy pleading requirements. act also created a safe harbor for forward-looking statements either accompanied by meaningful cautionary language or made without actual knowledge of their falsity. But while the Reform Act severely curtailed the ability to maintain strike suits in federal court, it did nothing to address similar suits brought in state courts based on state blue sky laws or common law. Corporate lobbies, particularly Silicon Valley technology firms, which are especially susceptible to strike suits because of their volatile stock prices, returned to Capitol Hill. (4) They argued that plaintiffs' lawyers were evading the restrictions created by the Reform Act and undermining its purpose by filing securities fraud actions in state rather than federal court. Particularly, it was contended, parallel litigation in state courts allowed plaintiffs to circumvent the federal discovery stay and that the migration of suits to state courts all but eviscerated the Reform Act's safe harbor for forward-looking statements. (5) Congress responded by enacting SLUSA, (6) which preempts under the supremacy clause certain state law securities fraud claims by allowing automatic removal to federal court, followed by dismissal. By steering most securities fraud cases to the federal courts, SLUSA intended to `prevent plaintiffs from seeking to evade the protections that federal law provides against abusive litigation by filing suit in state, rather than federal, court.' (7) SCOPE OF SLUSA act itself provides only general guidance as to the precise scope of SLUSA's pre-emptive force. …" @default.
• W761014712 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W761014712 creator A5049687765 @default.
• W761014712 date "2002-10-01" @default.
• W761014712 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W761014712 title "Life after SLUSA: What Is the Fate of Holding Claims? the Pre-Emptive Force of the 1998 Legislation Should Not Upset the Long-Held Balance in the U.S. Federal System by Trumping All State Actions" @default.
• W761014712 hasPublicationYear "2002" @default.
• W761014712 type Work @default.
• W761014712 sameAs 761014712 @default.
• W761014712 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W761014712 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W761014712 hasAuthorship W761014712A5049687765 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C11413529 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C120757647 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C2776034101 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C2776687834 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C2776801101 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C2777351106 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C2778213722 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C39389867 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C48103436 @default.
• W761014712 hasConcept C97460637 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C10138342 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C11413529 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C120757647 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C144133560 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C162324750 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C17744445 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C199539241 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C2776034101 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C2776687834 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C2776801101 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C2777351106 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C2778213722 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C2778272461 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C39389867 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C41008148 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C48103436 @default.
• W761014712 hasConceptScore W761014712C97460637 @default.
• W761014712 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W761014712 hasLocation W7610147121 @default.
• W761014712 hasOpenAccess W761014712 @default.
• W761014712 hasPrimaryLocation W7610147121 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W123609518 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W1528075273 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W1562250523 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W1579362128 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W2240733416 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W2254537249 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W2255112517 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W2256258430 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W2298862212 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W23167534 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W233409848 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W237907467 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W284520908 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W2973830153 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W3045341468 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W30984692 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W3123316665 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W3123444605 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W3124478102 @default.
• W761014712 hasRelatedWork W63534296 @default.
• W761014712 hasVolume "69" @default.
• W761014712 isParatext "false" @default.
• W761014712 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W761014712 magId "761014712" @default.
• W761014712 workType "article" @default.