halliburton
co
et
al
erica
john
fund
fka
archdiocese
milwaukee
supporting
fund
argued
march
decided
june
investors
recover
damages
private
securities
fraud
action
prove
relied
defendant
misrepresentation
deciding
buy
sell
company
stock
basic
levinson
held
investors
satisfy
reliance
requirement
invoking
presumption
price
stock
traded
efficient
market
reflects
public
material
information
including
material
misrepresentations
also
held
however
defendant
rebut
presumption
showing
alleged
misrepresentation
actually
affect
stock
price
price
impact
respondent
erica
john
fund
epj
fund
filed
putative
class
action
halliburton
one
executives
collectively
halliburton
alleging
made
misrepresentations
designed
inflate
halliburton
stock
price
violation
section
securities
exchange
act
securities
exchange
commission
rule
district
initially
denied
epj
fund
class
certification
motion
fifth
circuit
affirmed
vacated
judgment
concluding
securities
fraud
plaintiffs
need
prove
loss
causation
causal
connection
defendants
alleged
misrepresentations
plaintiffs
economic
losses
class
certification
stage
order
invoke
basic
presumption
reliance
remand
halliburton
argued
class
certification
nonetheless
inappropriate
evidence
earlier
introduced
disprove
loss
causation
also
showed
alleged
misrepresentations
affected
stock
price
demonstrating
absence
price
impact
halliburton
contended
rebutted
basic
presumption
without
benefit
presumption
investors
prove
reliance
individual
basis
meaning
individual
issues
predominate
common
ones
class
certification
inappropriate
federal
rule
civil
procedure
district
rejected
halliburton
argument
certified
class
fifth
circuit
affirmed
concluding
halliburton
use
price
impact
evidence
rebut
basic
presumption
trial
class
certification
stage
held
halliburton
shown
special
justification
dickerson
overruling
basic
presumption
reliance
pp
recover
damages
section
rule
plaintiff
must
prove
relevant
upon
misrepresentation
omission
amgen
connecticut
retirement
plans
trust
funds
recognized
basic
however
requiring
direct
proof
reliance
every
individual
plaintiff
place
unnecessarily
unrealistic
evidentiary
burden
plaintiff
traded
impersonal
market
effectively
prevent
plaintiffs
proceeding
class
action
rule
suits
address
concerns
held
plaintiffs
satisfy
reliance
element
rule
action
invoking
rebuttable
presumption
reliance
based
presumption
known
theory
holds
market
price
shares
traded
markets
reflects
publicly
available
information
hence
material
misrepresentations
also
noted
typical
investor
buys
sells
stock
price
set
market
reliance
integrity
price
result
whenever
investor
buys
sells
stock
market
price
reliance
public
material
misrepresentations
may
presumed
purposes
rule
action
id
basic
also
emphasized
presumption
reliance
rebuttable
rather
conclusive
pp
none
halliburton
arguments
overruling
basic
discredit
decision
constitute
special
justification
pp
halliburton
first
argues
basic
presumption
inconsistent
congress
intent
passing
exchange
act
argument
made
dissenting
justices
basic
basic
majority
find
argument
persuasive
halliburton
given
new
reason
endorse
pp
halliburton
also
contends
basic
rested
two
premises
undermined
developments
economic
theory
first
argues
basic
espoused
robust
view
market
efficiency
longer
tenable
light
empirical
evidence
ostensibly
showing
material
public
information
often
quickly
incorporated
stock
prices
basic
acknowledged
however
debate
among
economists
efficiency
capital
markets
refused
endorse
particular
theory
quickly
completely
publicly
available
information
reflected
market
price
instead
based
presumption
reliance
fairly
modest
premise
market
professionals
generally
consider
publicly
announced
material
statements
companies
thereby
affecting
stock
market
prices
moreover
making
presumption
rebuttable
basic
recognized
market
efficiency
matter
degree
accordingly
made
matter
proof
halliburton
identified
kind
fundamental
shift
economic
theory
justify
overruling
precedent
ground
misunderstood
since
overtaken
economic
realities
halliburton
also
contests
premise
investors
invest
reliance
integrity
market
price
identifying
number
classes
investors
price
integrity
supposedly
marginal
irrelevant
basic
never
denied
existence
investors
event
rely
least
facts
market
prices
incorporate
public
information
within
reasonable
period
market
prices
however
inaccurate
distorted
fraud
pp
principle
stare
decisis
respect
statutory
interpretation
remains
free
alter
done
john
sand
gravel
basic
presumption
reliance
presumption
inconsistent
recent
decisions
construing
rule
cause
action
central
bank
denver
first
interstate
bank
denver
stoneridge
investment
partners
llc
declined
effectively
eliminate
reliance
element
extending
liability
entirely
new
categories
defendants
made
material
public
misrepresentation
basic
presumption
contrast
merely
provides
alternative
means
satisfying
reliance
element
basic
presumption
inconsistent
recent
decisions
governing
class
action
certification
require
plaintiffs
prove
simply
plead
proposed
class
satisfies
requirement
federal
rule
civil
procedure
including
applicable
predominance
requirement
rule
see
stores
dukes
basic
presumption
relieve
plaintiffs
burden
rather
sets
forth
plaintiffs
must
prove
demonstrate
predominance
finally
halliburton
emphasizes
possible
harmful
consequences
securities
class
actions
facilitated
basic
presumption
concerns
appropriately
addressed
congress
fact
responded
extent
many
pp
reasons
declines
overrule
basic
presumption
reliance
also
declines
modify
prerequisites
invoking
presumption
requiring
plaintiffs
prove
price
impact
directly
class
certification
stage
basic
presumption
incorporates
two
constituent
presumptions
first
plaintiff
shows
defendant
misrepresentation
public
material
stock
traded
generally
efficient
market
entitled
presumption
misrepresentation
affected
stock
price
second
plaintiff
also
shows
purchased
stock
market
price
relevant
period
entitled
presumption
purchased
stock
reliance
defendant
misrepresentation
requiring
plaintiffs
prove
price
impact
directly
take
away
first
constituent
presumption
halliburton
argument
argument
overruling
basic
presumption
altogether
meets
fate
pp
agrees
halliburton
however
defendants
must
afforded
opportunity
rebut
presumption
reliance
class
certification
evidence
lack
price
impact
defendants
may
already
introduce
evidence
merits
stage
rebut
basic
presumption
well
class
certification
stage
counter
plaintiff
showing
market
efficiency
forbidding
defendants
rely
evidence
prior
class
certification
particular
purpose
rebutting
presumption
altogether
makes
sense
readily
lead
results
inconsistent
basic
logic
basic
allows
plaintiffs
establish
price
impact
indirectly
showing
stock
traded
efficient
market
defendant
misrepresentations
public
material
indirect
proxy
preclude
consideration
defendant
direct
salient
evidence
showing
alleged
misrepresentation
actually
affect
stock
price
consequently
basic
presumption
apply
amgen
require
different
result
held
materiality
though
prerequisite
invoking
basic
presumption
left
merits
stage
bear
predominance
requirement
rule
contrast
fact
misrepresentation
price
impact
basic
fundamental
premise
erica
john
fund
halliburton
thus
everything
issue
predominance
class
certification
stage
reliance
shown
basic
presumption
publicity
market
efficiency
prerequisites
must
proved
class
certification
given
indirect
evidence
price
impact
class
certification
stage
event
reason
artificially
limit
inquiry
stage
excluding
direct
evidence
price
impact
pp
vacated
remanded
roberts
delivered
opinion
kennedy
ginsburg
breyer
sotomayor
kagan
joined
ginsburg
filed
concurring
opinion
breyer
sotomayor
joined
thomas
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
scalia
alito
joined
opinion
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
washington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
halliburton
et
petitioners
erica
john
fund
fka
archdiocese
milwaukee
supporting
fund
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
june
chief
justice
roberts
delivered
opinion
investors
recover
damages
private
securities
fraud
action
prove
relied
defendant
misrepresentation
deciding
buy
sell
company
stock
basic
levinson
held
investors
satisfy
reliance
requirement
invoking
presumption
price
stock
traded
efficient
market
reflects
public
material
information
including
material
misstatements
case
concluded
anyone
buys
sells
stock
market
price
may
considered
relied
misstatements
also
held
however
defendant
rebut
presumption
number
ways
including
showing
alleged
misrepresentation
actually
affect
stock
price
misrepresentation
price
impact
questions
presented
whether
overrule
modify
basic
presumption
reliance
whether
defendants
nonetheless
afforded
opportunity
securities
class
action
cases
rebut
presumption
class
certification
stage
showing
lack
price
impact
respondent
erica
john
fund
epj
fund
lead
plaintiff
putative
class
action
halliburton
one
executives
collectively
halliburton
alleging
violations
section
securities
exchange
act
stat
securities
exchange
commission
rule
cfr
according
epj
fund
june
december
halliburton
made
series
misrepresentations
regarding
potential
liability
asbestos
litigation
expected
revenue
certain
construction
contracts
anticipated
benefits
merger
another
company
attempt
inflate
price
stock
halliburton
subsequently
made
number
corrective
disclosures
epj
fund
contends
caused
company
stock
price
drop
investors
lose
money
epj
fund
moved
certify
class
comprising
investors
purchased
halliburton
common
stock
class
period
district
found
proposed
class
satisfied
threshold
requirements
federal
rule
civil
procedure
sufficiently
numerous
common
questions
law
fact
representative
parties
claims
typical
class
claims
representatives
fairly
adequately
protect
interests
class
app
pet
cert
except
one
difficulty
also
concluded
class
satisfied
requirement
rule
questions
law
fact
common
class
members
predominate
questions
affecting
individual
members
see
difficulty
circuit
precedent
required
securities
fraud
plaintiffs
prove
loss
causation
causal
connection
defendants
alleged
misrepresentations
plaintiffs
economic
losses
order
invoke
basic
presumption
reliance
obtain
class
certification
app
pet
cert
epj
fund
demonstrated
connection
halliburton
alleged
misrepresentations
district
refused
certify
proposed
class
appeals
fifth
circuit
affirmed
denial
class
certification
ground
archdiocese
milwaukee
supporting
fund
halliburton
granted
certiorari
vacated
judgment
finding
nothing
basic
logic
justify
fifth
circuit
requirement
securities
fraud
plaintiffs
prove
loss
causation
class
certification
stage
order
invoke
basic
presumption
reliance
erica
john
fund
halliburton
halliburton
slip
loss
causation
explained
addresses
matter
different
whether
investor
relied
misrepresentation
presumptively
otherwise
buying
selling
stock
ibid
remanded
case
lower
courts
consider
arguments
class
certification
halliburton
preserved
slip
remand
halliburton
argued
class
certification
inappropriate
evidence
earlier
introduced
disprove
loss
causation
also
showed
none
alleged
misrepresentations
actually
affected
stock
price
demonstrating
absence
price
impact
halliburton
contended
rebutted
basic
presumption
members
proposed
class
relied
alleged
misrepresentations
simply
buying
selling
stock
market
price
without
benefit
basic
presumption
investors
prove
reliance
individual
basis
meaning
individual
issues
predominate
common
ones
district
declined
consider
halliburton
argument
holding
basic
presumption
applied
certifying
class
rule
app
pet
cert
fifth
circuit
affirmed
found
halliburton
preserved
price
impact
argument
avail
acknowledging
halliburton
price
impact
evidence
used
trial
merits
refute
presumption
reliance
held
halliburton
use
evidence
purpose
class
certification
stage
rice
impact
evidence
explained
bear
question
common
question
predominance
rule
thus
appropriately
considered
merits
class
certified
ibid
granted
certiorari
time
resolve
conflict
among
circuits
whether
securities
fraud
defendants
may
attempt
rebut
basic
presumption
class
certification
stage
evidence
lack
price
impact
also
accepted
halliburton
invitation
reconsider
presumption
reliance
securities
fraud
claims
adopted
basic
ii
halliburton
urges
us
overrule
basic
presumption
reliance
instead
require
every
securities
fraud
plaintiff
prove
actually
relied
defendant
misrepresentation
deciding
buy
sell
company
stock
overturning
precedent
however
require
special
justification
argument
precedent
wrongly
decided
dickerson
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
halliburton
failed
make
showing
section
securities
exchange
act
securities
exchange
commission
rule
prohibit
making
material
misstatement
omission
connection
purchase
sale
security
although
section
create
express
private
cause
action
long
recognized
implied
private
cause
action
enforce
provision
implementing
regulation
see
blue
chip
stamps
manor
drug
stores
recover
damages
violations
section
rule
plaintiff
must
prove
material
misrepresentation
omission
defendant
scienter
connection
misrepresentation
omission
purchase
sale
security
reliance
upon
misrepresentation
omission
economic
loss
loss
causation
amgen
connecticut
retirement
plans
trust
funds
slip
quoting
matrixx
initiatives
siracusano
slip
reliance
element
proper
connection
defendant
misrepresentation
plaintiff
injury
slip
quoting
halliburton
slip
traditional
direct
way
plaintiff
demonstrate
reliance
showing
aware
company
statement
engaged
relevant
transaction
purchasing
common
stock
based
specific
misrepresentation
slip
basic
however
recognized
requiring
direct
proof
reliance
place
unnecessarily
unrealistic
evidentiary
burden
rule
plaintiff
traded
impersonal
market
even
assuming
investor
prove
aware
misrepresentation
still
show
speculative
state
facts
acted
misrepresentation
made
ibid
also
noted
equiring
proof
individualized
reliance
every
securities
fraud
plaintiff
effectively
prevent
plaintiffs
proceeding
class
action
rule
suits
every
plaintiff
prove
direct
reliance
defendant
misrepresentation
individual
issues
overwhelm
common
ones
making
certification
rule
inappropriate
ibid
address
concerns
basic
held
securities
fraud
plaintiffs
certain
circumstances
satisfy
reliance
element
rule
action
invoking
rebuttable
presumption
reliance
rather
proving
direct
reliance
misrepresentation
based
presumption
known
theory
holds
market
price
shares
traded
markets
reflects
publicly
available
information
hence
material
misrepresentations
also
noted
rather
scrutinize
every
piece
public
information
company
typical
investor
buys
sells
stock
price
set
market
reliance
integrity
price
belief
reflects
public
material
information
result
whenever
investor
buys
sells
stock
market
price
reliance
public
material
misrepresentations
may
presumed
purposes
rule
action
ibid
based
theory
plaintiff
must
make
following
showings
demonstrate
presumption
reliance
applies
given
case
alleged
misrepresentations
publicly
known
material
stock
traded
efficient
market
plaintiff
traded
stock
time
misrepresentations
made
truth
revealed
see
halliburton
supra
slip
time
basic
emphasized
presumption
reliance
rebuttable
rather
conclusive
specifically
ny
showing
severs
link
alleged
misrepresentation
either
price
received
paid
plaintiff
decision
trade
fair
market
price
sufficient
rebut
presumption
reliance
example
defendant
show
alleged
misrepresentation
whatever
reason
actually
affect
market
price
plaintiff
bought
sold
stock
even
aware
stock
price
tainted
fraud
presumption
reliance
apply
either
cases
plaintiff
prove
directly
relied
defendant
misrepresentation
buying
selling
stock
halliburton
contends
securities
fraud
plaintiffs
always
prove
direct
reliance
basic
erred
allowing
invoke
presumption
reliance
instead
according
halliburton
basic
presumption
contravenes
congressional
intent
undermined
subsequent
developments
economic
theory
neither
argument
however
discredits
basic
constitute
special
justification
overruling
decision
halliburton
first
argues
basic
presumption
inconsistent
congress
intent
passing
exchange
act
section
action
construct
congress
enact
halliburton
insists
must
identify
borrow
express
provision
analogous
private
right
action
brief
petitioners
quoting
stoneridge
investment
partners
llc
atlanta
musick
peeler
garrett
employers
ins
wausau
according
halliburton
closest
analogue
section
section
act
creates
express
private
cause
action
allowing
investors
recover
damages
based
misrepresentations
made
certain
regulatory
filings
provision
requires
investor
prove
bought
sold
stock
reliance
upon
defendant
misrepresentation
ibid
ignoring
direct
reliance
requirement
argument
goes
basic
relieved
rule
plaintiffs
burden
congress
imposed
created
cause
action
epj
fund
contests
premises
halliburton
argument
arguing
congress
affirmed
basic
construction
section
event
closest
analogue
section
section
section
provision
require
actual
reliance
need
settle
dispute
basic
dissenting
justices
made
argument
based
section
halliburton
presses
see
white
concurring
part
dissenting
part
basic
majority
find
argument
persuasive
halliburton
given
us
new
reason
endorse
halliburton
primary
argument
overruling
basic
decision
rested
two
premises
longer
withstand
scrutiny
first
premise
concerns
known
efficient
capital
markets
hypothesis
basic
stated
market
price
shares
traded
markets
reflects
publicly
available
information
hence
material
misrepresentations
statement
halliburton
concludes
basic
espoused
robust
view
market
efficiency
longer
tenable
empirical
evidence
capital
markets
fundamentally
efficient
brief
petitioners
quoting
lev
de
villiers
stock
price
crashes
damages
legal
economic
policy
analysis
stan
rev
support
contention
halliburton
cites
studies
purporting
show
public
information
often
incorporated
immediately
much
less
rationally
market
prices
brief
petitioners
see
see
also
brief
law
professors
amici
curiae
halliburton
course
maintain
capital
markets
always
inefficient
rather
view
basic
fundamental
error
ignore
fact
binary
yes
question
brief
petitioners
quoting
langevoort
basic
twenty
rethinking
fraud
market
rev
markets
securities
efficient
markets
others
even
single
market
process
different
kinds
information
less
efficiently
depending
widely
information
disseminated
easily
understood
brief
petitioners
yet
basic
halliburton
asserts
glossed
nuances
assuming
false
dichotomy
renders
presumption
reliance
underinclusive
overinclusive
misrepresentation
distort
stock
market
price
even
generally
inefficient
market
misrepresentation
leave
stock
market
price
unaffected
even
generally
efficient
one
brief
petitioners
halliburton
criticisms
fail
take
basic
terms
halliburton
focuses
debate
among
economists
degree
market
price
company
stock
reflects
public
information
company
thus
degree
investor
earn
abnormal
return
trading
information
see
brief
financial
economists
amici
curiae
describing
debate
debate
new
indeed
basic
acknowledged
declined
enter
fray
declaring
need
determine
adjudication
economists
social
scientists
debated
use
sophisticated
statistical
analysis
application
economic
theory
recognize
presumption
reliance
explained
conclusively
adopt
particular
theory
quickly
completely
publicly
available
information
reflected
market
price
instead
based
presumption
fairly
modest
premise
market
professionals
generally
consider
publicly
announced
material
statements
companies
thereby
affecting
stock
market
prices
basic
presumption
reliance
thus
rest
binary
view
market
efficiency
indeed
making
presumption
rebuttable
basic
recognized
market
efficiency
matter
degree
accordingly
made
matter
proof
academic
debates
discussed
halliburton
refuted
modest
premise
underlying
presumption
reliance
even
foremost
critics
hypothesis
acknowledge
public
information
generally
affects
stock
prices
see
shiller
share
honors
agree
disagree
times
course
prices
reflect
available
information
halliburton
also
conceded
much
reply
brief
oral
argument
see
reply
brief
market
prices
generally
respond
new
material
information
tr
oral
arg
debates
precise
degree
stock
prices
accurately
reflect
public
information
thus
largely
beside
point
price
stock
may
inaccurate
detract
fact
false
statements
affect
cause
loss
basic
requires
schleicher
wendt
easterbrook
even
though
efficient
capital
markets
hypothesis
may
garnered
substantial
criticism
since
basic
post
thomas
concurring
judgment
halliburton
identified
kind
fundamental
shift
economic
theory
justify
overruling
precedent
ground
misunderstood
since
overtaken
economic
realities
contrast
state
oil
khan
unanimously
overruling
albrecht
herald
halliburton
also
contests
second
premise
underlying
basic
presumption
notion
investors
invest
reliance
integrity
market
price
reply
brief
quoting
alteration
original
halliburton
identifies
number
classes
investors
price
integrity
supposedly
marginal
irrelevant
reply
brief
primary
example
value
investor
believes
certain
stocks
undervalued
overvalued
attempts
beat
market
buying
undervalued
stocks
selling
overvalued
ones
brief
petitioners
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
see
also
brief
vivendi
amicus
curiae
describing
investment
strategies
day
traders
volatility
arbitragers
value
investors
many
investors
indifferent
prices
halliburton
contends
courts
presume
investors
rely
integrity
prices
misrepresentations
incorporated
reply
brief
basic
never
denied
existence
investors
recently
explained
basic
concluded
reasonable
presume
investors
knowing
little
hope
outperforming
market
long
run
based
solely
analysis
publicly
available
information
rely
security
market
price
unbiased
assessment
security
value
light
public
information
amgen
slip
emphasis
added
event
reason
suppose
even
halliburton
main
counterexample
value
investor
indifferent
integrity
market
prices
halliburton
suggests
investor
implicitly
relies
fact
stock
market
price
eventually
reflect
material
information
else
market
correction
profit
depends
occur
sure
value
investor
believe
market
price
accurately
reflects
public
information
time
transacts
post
indirectly
rely
misstatement
sense
relevant
basic
presumption
need
trade
stock
based
belief
market
price
incorporate
public
information
within
reasonable
period
value
investor
also
presumably
tries
estimate
undervalued
overvalued
particular
stock
estimates
skewed
market
price
tainted
fraud
principle
stare
decisis
respect
statutory
interpretation
remains
free
alter
done
john
sand
gravel
quoting
patterson
mclean
credit
union
basic
presumption
reliance
although
presumption
judicially
created
doctrine
designed
implement
judicially
created
cause
action
described
presumption
substantive
doctrine
federal
law
amgen
supra
slip
provides
way
satisfying
reliance
element
rule
cause
action
see
dura
pharmaceuticals
broudo
element
cause
action
congress
may
overturn
modify
aspect
interpretations
reliance
requirement
including
basic
presumption
given
possibility
see
reason
exempt
basic
presumption
ordinary
principles
stare
decisis
buttress
case
overruling
basic
halliburton
contends
addition
wrongly
decided
decision
inconsistent
recent
decisions
construing
rule
cause
action
halliburton
notes
held
must
give
dimensions
right
action
congress
authorize
first
enacted
statute
expand
revisited
law
janus
capital
group
first
derivative
traders
slip
quoting
stoneridge
see
central
bank
denver
first
interstate
bank
denver
refusing
recognize
liability
rule
cause
action
stoneridge
supra
refusing
extend
rule
liability
certain
secondary
actors
make
material
misstatements
yet
basic
presumption
halliburton
asserts
opposite
expanding
rule
cause
action
brief
petitioners
central
bank
stoneridge
declined
extend
rule
liability
entirely
new
categories
defendants
made
material
public
misrepresentation
extension
explained
eviscerated
requirement
plaintiff
prove
relied
misrepresentation
made
defendant
see
central
bank
supra
ridge
supra
basic
presumption
eliminate
requirement
rather
provides
alternative
means
satisfying
presumption
makes
easier
plaintiffs
prove
reliance
alter
elements
rule
cause
action
thus
maintains
action
original
legal
scope
halliburton
also
argues
basic
presumption
reconciled
recent
decisions
governing
class
action
certification
federal
rule
civil
procedure
decisions
made
clear
plaintiffs
wishing
proceed
class
action
must
actually
prove
simply
plead
proposed
class
satisfies
requirement
rule
including
applicable
predominance
requirement
rule
see
stores
dukes
slip
comcast
behrend
slip
according
halliburton
basic
relieves
rule
plaintiffs
burden
allowing
courts
presume
common
issues
reliance
predominate
individual
ones
effect
basic
presumption
securities
class
action
cases
crucial
requirement
class
certification
usually
predominance
requirement
rule
basic
presumption
relieve
plaintiffs
burden
proving
class
certification
requirement
met
basic
instead
establishes
plaintiff
satisfies
burden
proving
prerequisites
invoking
presumption
namely
publicity
materiality
market
efficiency
market
timing
burden
proving
prerequisites
still
rests
plaintiffs
exception
materiality
must
satisfied
class
certification
basic
words
allow
plaintiffs
simply
plead
common
questions
reliance
predominate
individual
ones
rather
sets
forth
must
prove
demonstrate
predominance
basic
afford
defendants
opportunity
rebut
presumption
reliance
respect
individual
plaintiff
showing
rely
integrity
market
price
trading
stock
effect
leav
ing
individualized
questions
reliance
case
post
reason
think
questions
overwhelm
common
ones
render
class
certification
inappropriate
rule
defendant
might
attempt
pick
occasional
class
member
individualized
rebuttal
cause
individual
questions
predominate
finally
halliburton
amici
contend
facilitating
securities
class
actions
basic
presumption
produces
number
serious
harmful
consequences
class
actions
say
allow
plaintiffs
extort
large
settlements
defendants
meritless
claims
punish
innocent
shareholders
end
pay
settlements
judgments
impose
excessive
costs
businesses
consume
disproportionately
large
share
judicial
resources
brief
petitioners
concerns
appropriately
addressed
congress
fact
responded
extent
many
issues
raised
halliburton
amici
congress
example
enacted
private
securities
litigation
reform
act
pslra
stat
sought
combat
perceived
abuses
securities
litigation
heightened
pleading
requirements
limits
damages
attorney
fees
safe
harbor
certain
kinds
statements
restrictions
selection
lead
plaintiffs
securities
class
actions
sanctions
frivolous
litigation
stays
discovery
pending
motions
dismiss
see
amgen
slip
prevent
plaintiffs
circumventing
restrictions
bringing
securities
class
actions
state
law
state
congress
also
enacted
securities
litigation
uniform
standards
act
stat
precludes
many
state
law
class
actions
alleging
securities
fraud
see
amgen
supra
slip
legislation
demonstrates
congress
willingness
consider
policy
concerns
sort
halliburton
says
lead
us
overrule
basic
iii
halliburton
proposes
two
alternatives
overruling
basic
alleviate
regards
decision
serious
flaws
first
alternative
require
plaintiffs
prove
defendant
misrepresentation
actually
affected
stock
price
price
impact
order
invoke
basic
presumption
enough
halliburton
contends
plaintiffs
demonstrate
general
efficiency
market
stock
traded
halliburton
second
proposed
alternative
allow
defendants
rebut
presumption
reliance
evidence
lack
price
impact
merits
stage
agree
defendants
may
already
also
class
certification
noted
invoke
basic
presumption
plaintiff
must
prove
alleged
misrepresentations
publicly
known
material
stock
traded
efficient
market
plaintiff
traded
stock
misrepresentations
made
truth
revealed
see
basic
amgen
supra
slip
requirements
follows
theory
underlying
presumption
misrepresentation
publicly
known
distorted
stock
market
price
misrepresentation
immaterial
viewed
reasonable
investor
significantly
altered
total
mix
information
made
available
basic
supra
quoting
tsc
industries
northway
market
stock
traded
inefficient
plaintiff
buy
sell
stock
misrepresentation
made
truth
revealed
said
acted
reliance
price
first
three
prerequisites
directed
price
impact
whether
alleged
misrepresentations
affected
market
price
first
place
halliburton
slip
absence
price
impact
basic
theory
presumption
reliance
collapse
fundamental
premise
underlying
presumption
investor
presumptively
relies
misrepresentation
long
reflected
market
price
time
transaction
slip
grounding
contention
investor
indirectly
relied
th
misrepresentation
reliance
integrity
market
price
amgen
supra
slip
halliburton
argues
since
basic
presumption
hinges
price
impact
plaintiffs
required
prove
directly
order
invoke
presumption
proving
presumption
prerequisites
best
imperfect
proxy
price
impact
suffice
far
modest
refinement
basic
presumption
proposal
radically
alter
required
showing
reliance
element
rule
cause
action
called
basic
presumption
actually
incorporates
two
constituent
presumptions
first
plaintiff
shows
defendant
misrepresentation
public
material
stock
traded
generally
efficient
market
entitled
presumption
misrepresentation
affected
stock
price
second
plaintiff
also
shows
purchased
stock
market
price
relevant
period
entitled
presumption
purchased
stock
reliance
defendant
misrepresentation
requiring
plaintiffs
prove
price
impact
directly
halliburton
proposal
take
away
first
constituent
presumption
halliburton
argument
primary
argument
overruling
basic
presumption
altogether
market
efficiency
proposition
public
material
misrepresentation
might
affect
stock
price
even
generally
efficient
market
explained
basic
never
suggested
otherwise
affords
defendants
opportunity
rebut
presumption
showing
among
things
particular
misrepresentation
issue
affect
stock
market
price
reasons
declined
completely
jettison
basic
presumption
decline
effectively
jettison
half
revising
prerequisites
invoking
even
plaintiffs
need
directly
prove
price
impact
invoke
basic
presumption
halliburton
contends
defendants
least
allowed
defeat
presumption
class
certification
stage
evidence
misrepresentation
fact
affect
stock
price
agree
dispute
defendants
may
introduce
evidence
merits
stage
rebut
basic
presumption
basic
made
clear
presumption
rebutted
appropriate
evidence
including
evidence
asserted
misrepresentation
correction
affect
market
price
defendant
stock
halliburton
supra
slip
see
basic
supra
dispute
defendants
may
introduce
price
impact
evidence
class
certification
stage
long
purpose
countering
plaintiff
showing
market
efficiency
rather
directly
rebutting
presumption
epj
fund
acknowledges
course
defendants
introduce
evidence
class
certification
lack
price
impact
evidence
market
efficient
brief
respondent
see
also
brief
amicus
curiae
plaintiffs
introduce
evidence
existence
price
impact
connection
event
studies
regression
analyses
seek
show
market
price
defendant
stock
tends
respond
pertinent
publicly
reported
events
see
brief
law
professors
amici
curiae
case
example
epj
fund
submitted
event
study
various
episodes
might
expected
affect
price
halliburton
stock
order
demonstrate
market
stock
takes
account
material
public
information
company
see
app
describing
results
study
episodes
examined
epj
fund
event
study
included
one
alleged
misrepresentations
form
basis
fund
suit
see
see
also
securities
litigation
event
study
included
effect
misrepresentation
challenged
case
defendants
like
plaintiffs
may
accordingly
submit
price
impact
evidence
prior
class
certification
defendants
may
epj
fund
insists
appeals
held
rely
evidence
prior
class
certification
particular
purpose
rebutting
presumption
altogether
restriction
makes
sense
readily
lead
bizarre
results
suppose
defendant
certification
stage
submits
event
study
looking
impact
price
stock
six
discrete
events
effort
refute
plaintiffs
claim
general
market
efficiency
agree
defendant
may
suppose
one
six
events
specific
misrepresentation
asserted
plaintiffs
agree
perfectly
acceptable
suppose
district
determines
despite
defendant
study
plaintiff
carried
burden
prove
market
efficiency
evidence
shows
price
impact
respect
specific
misrepresentation
challenged
suit
evidence
certification
stage
thus
shows
efficient
market
alleged
misrepresentation
price
impact
yet
epj
fund
view
plaintiffs
action
certified
proceed
class
action
entails
even
though
theory
apply
common
reliance
thus
presumed
result
inconsistent
basic
logic
basic
theory
market
efficiency
prerequisites
invoking
presumption
constitute
indirect
way
showing
price
impact
explained
appropriate
allow
plaintiffs
rely
indirect
proxy
price
impact
rather
requiring
prove
price
impact
directly
given
basic
rationales
recognizing
presumption
reliance
first
place
see
supra
indirect
proxy
preclude
direct
evidence
evidence
available
explained
basic
ny
showing
severs
link
alleged
misrepresentation
price
received
paid
plaintiff
sufficient
rebut
presumption
reliance
basis
finding
fraud
transmitted
market
price
gone
without
presumption
reliance
rule
suit
proceed
class
action
plaintiff
prove
reliance
individually
common
issues
predominate
individual
ones
required
rule
price
impact
thus
essential
precondition
rule
class
action
basic
allows
plaintiffs
establish
precondition
indirectly
require
courts
ignore
defendant
direct
salient
evidence
showing
alleged
misrepresentation
actually
affect
stock
market
price
consequently
basic
presumption
apply
appeals
relied
decision
amgen
holding
halliburton
introduce
evidence
lack
price
impact
class
certification
stage
question
amgen
whether
plaintiffs
required
prove
defendants
permitted
disprove
materiality
class
certification
even
though
materiality
prerequisite
invoking
basic
presumption
held
left
merits
stage
bear
predominance
requirement
rule
reasoned
materiality
objective
issue
susceptible
common
classwide
proof
slip
also
noted
failure
prove
materiality
necessarily
defeat
every
plaintiff
claim
merits
simply
preclude
invocation
presumption
thereby
cause
individual
questions
reliance
predominate
common
ones
ibid
see
also
slip
latter
respect
explained
materiality
differs
publicity
market
efficiency
prerequisites
neither
necessary
prove
rule
claim
merits
slip
epj
fund
argues
much
foregoing
said
price
impact
well
fair
enough
price
impact
differs
materiality
crucial
respect
given
basic
prerequisites
must
still
proved
class
certification
stage
common
issue
materiality
left
merits
stage
without
risking
certification
classes
individual
issues
end
overwhelming
common
ones
materiality
discrete
issue
resolved
isolation
prerequisites
wholly
confined
merits
stage
price
impact
different
fact
misrepresentation
reflected
market
price
time
transaction
price
impact
basic
fundamental
premise
halliburton
slip
thus
everything
issue
predominance
class
certification
stage
reliance
shown
basic
presumption
publicity
market
efficiency
prerequisites
must
proved
class
certification
without
proof
prerequisites
theory
underlying
presumption
completely
collapses
rendering
class
certification
inappropriate
explained
publicity
market
efficiency
nothing
prerequisites
indirect
showing
price
impact
dispute
least
indirect
proof
price
impact
needed
ensure
questions
law
fact
common
class
amgen
slip
emphasis
deleted
see
slip
even
though
proof
also
highly
relevant
merits
stage
choice
case
allowing
price
impact
evidence
class
certification
stage
relegating
merits
evidence
price
impact
certification
stage
event
choice
rather
limiting
price
impact
inquiry
class
certification
indirect
evidence
allowing
consideration
direct
evidence
well
explained
see
reason
artificially
limit
inquiry
certification
stage
indirect
evidence
price
impact
defendants
may
seek
defeat
basic
presumption
stage
direct
well
indirect
price
impact
evidence
years
ago
held
plaintiffs
satisfy
reliance
element
rule
cause
action
invoking
presumption
public
material
misrepresentation
distort
price
stock
traded
efficient
market
anyone
purchases
stock
market
price
may
considered
done
reliance
misrepresentation
adhere
decision
decline
modify
prerequisites
invoking
presumption
reliance
maintain
consistency
presumption
class
certification
requirements
federal
rule
civil
procedure
defendants
must
afforded
opportunity
class
certification
defeat
presumption
evidence
alleged
misrepresentation
actually
affect
market
price
stock
courts
denied
halliburton
opportunity
vacate
judgment
appeals
fifth
circuit
remand
case
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
ginsburg
concurring
halliburton
et
petitioners
erica
john
fund
fka
archdiocese
milwaukee
supporting
fund
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
june
justice
ginsburg
justice
breyer
justice
sotomayor
join
concurring
advancing
price
impact
consideration
merits
stage
certification
stage
may
broaden
scope
discovery
available
certification
see
tr
oral
arg
recognizes
incumbent
upon
defendant
show
absence
price
impact
see
ante
judgment
therefore
impose
heavy
toll
plaintiffs
tenable
claims
understanding
join
opinion
thomas
concurring
judgment
halliburton
et
petitioners
erica
john
fund
fka
archdiocese
milwaukee
supporting
fund
writ
certiorari
appeals
fifth
circuit
june
justice
thomas
justice
scalia
justice
alito
join
concurring
judgment
implied
rule
private
cause
action
relic
heady
days
assumed
powers
create
causes
action
correctional
services
malesko
scalia
concurring
see
case
borak
since
ended
practice
authority
fashion
private
remedies
enforce
federal
law
belongs
congress
alone
ridge
investment
partners
llc
absent
statutory
authorization
cause
action
courts
may
create
one
matter
desirable
might
policy
matter
alexander
sandoval
basic
levinson
demonstrates
wisdom
rule
basic
presented
question
investors
must
prove
reliance
element
implied
rule
cause
action
requirement
plaintiff
buy
sell
stock
reliance
defendant
misstatement
transact
modern
impersonal
securities
exchanges
rule
action
statutory
resolved
question
interpreting
statutory
language
without
statute
interpret
guidance
however
began
instead
particular
policy
problem
investors
impersonal
markets
traditional
reliance
requirement
hard
prove
impossible
prove
common
among
plaintiffs
bringing
suits
task
thus
framed
resol
ving
rather
interpreting
statutory
text
turned
nascent
economic
theory
naked
intuitions
investment
behavior
efforts
fashion
new
easier
way
meet
reliance
requirement
result
evidentiary
presumption
based
fraud
market
theory
paved
way
class
actions
rule
today
asked
determine
whether
basic
correctly
decided
suggests
stare
decisis
demands
preserve
disagree
logic
economic
realities
subsequent
jurisprudence
undermined
foundations
basic
presumption
stare
decisis
prop
façade
remains
basic
overruled
understanding
basic
went
wrong
requires
explanation
reliance
requirement
traditionally
understood
reliance
plaintiff
upon
defendant
deceptive
acts
essential
element
implied
private
cause
stoneridge
supra
prove
reliance
plaintiff
must
show
causation
specific
misstatement
induced
investor
decision
engage
transaction
erica
john
fund
halliburton
slip
proof
ensures
proper
defendant
misrepresentation
plaintiff
namely
plaintiff
lost
money
result
misstatement
actually
defrauded
slip
see
also
dirks
sec
constitute
violation
rule
must
fraud
always
winners
losers
necessarily
defrauded
without
connection
rule
reduced
investor
insurance
plaintiff
recover
whenever
defendant
misstatement
distorted
stock
price
regardless
whether
misstatement
actually
tricked
plaintiff
buying
selling
stock
first
place
dura
pharmaceuticals
broudo
quoting
basic
supra
white
concurring
part
dissenting
part
traditional
reliance
element
requires
plaintiff
sho
aware
company
statement
engaged
relevant
transaction
based
specific
misrepresentation
erica
john
fund
supra
slip
investors
purchase
stock
third
parties
impersonal
exchanges
new
york
stock
exchange
often
aware
particular
statement
made
issuer
security
therefore
establish
transacted
based
specific
misrepresentation
traditional
reliance
requirement
amenable
class
treatment
inherently
individualized
nature
reliance
inquiry
renders
impossible
plaintiff
prove
common
questions
predominate
individual
ones
making
class
certification
improper
see
basic
supra
fed
rule
civ
proc
citing
difficulties
proof
class
certification
basic
dispensed
traditional
reliance
requirement
favor
new
one
based
new
version
reliance
two
related
parts
first
basic
suggested
plaintiffs
meet
reliance
requirement
reasoned
market
transmits
information
investor
processed
form
market
price
investor
thus
said
relied
specific
misstatement
market
incorporated
statement
market
price
security
investor
bought
sold
security
reliance
integrity
market
price
based
belief
market
price
ed
stock
underlying
second
basic
created
presumption
indirect
form
reliance
proved
based
primarily
certain
assumptions
economic
theory
investor
behavior
basic
afforded
plaintiffs
traded
efficient
markets
evidentiary
presumption
steps
novel
reliance
requirement
satisfied
market
incorporated
specific
misstatement
market
price
security
plaintiff
transact
reliance
integrity
defendant
ostensibly
entitled
rebut
presumption
putting
forth
evidence
either
steps
absent
ii
basic
reimagined
reliance
requirement
mistake
passage
time
compounded
failings
first
based
parts
presumption
reliance
questionable
understanding
disputed
economic
theory
flawed
intuitions
investor
behavior
second
basic
rebuttable
presumption
odds
subsequent
rule
cases
require
plaintiffs
seeking
class
certification
certification
requirements
like
predominance
common
questions
comcast
behrend
slip
quoting
stores
dukes
slip
finally
basic
presumption
investors
rely
integrity
market
price
virtually
irrebuttable
practice
means
essential
reliance
element
effectively
exists
name
basic
based
presumption
reliance
two
factual
assumptions
first
assumption
market
public
statements
generally
reflected
market
price
securities
second
investors
markets
transact
reliance
integrity
price
ibid
words
created
presumption
plaintiff
met
version
reliance
requirement
view
common
sense
probability
suggested
parts
met
reality
key
assumptions
highly
contestable
provide
necessary
support
basic
presumption
reliance
first
assumption
public
statements
reflected
market
price
grounded
economic
theory
garnered
substantial
criticism
since
basic
second
assumption
investors
categorically
rely
integrity
market
price
simply
wrong
first
assumption
publicly
available
information
including
public
misstatements
reflected
market
price
security
grounded
assumption
empirical
studies
testing
economic
theory
known
efficient
capital
markets
hypothesis
specifically
relied
upon
version
theory
posits
average
investor
earn
returns
beat
market
efficient
market
trading
basis
publicly
available
information
see
stout
mechanisms
market
inefficiency
introduction
new
finance
citing
fama
efficient
capital
markets
review
theory
empirical
work
finance
upshot
hypothesis
market
price
shares
traded
markets
reflec
publicly
available
information
hence
material
misrepresentations
basic
supra
time
basic
version
efficient
capital
markets
hypothesis
widely
accepted
see
dunbar
heller
view
market
efficiency
since
lost
luster
see
langevoort
basic
twenty
rethinking
fraud
market
rev
doubts
strength
pervasiveness
market
efficiency
much
greater
today
turns
even
markets
like
new
york
stock
exchange
uniformly
incorporate
information
market
prices
high
speed
riction
accessing
public
information
presence
processing
costs
means
public
information
impounded
security
price
alacrity
perhaps
quickness
cox
understanding
causation
private
securities
lawsuits
building
amgen
vand
rev
hereinafter
cox
example
information
easily
digestible
merger
announcements
stock
splits
especially
prominent
wall
street
journal
articles
may
incorporated
quickly
information
broadly
applicable
technical
securities
exchange
commission
filings
may
incorporated
slowly
even
ignored
see
stout
supra
see
merck
securities
litigation
wall
street
journal
article
caused
steep
decline
company
stock
price
even
though
information
contained
earlier
sec
disclosure
importantly
overwhelming
empirical
evidence
suggests
even
markets
incorporate
public
information
often
fail
accurately
lev
de
villiers
stock
price
crashes
damages
legal
economic
policy
analysis
stan
rev
see
also
many
share
price
movements
seem
unrelated
specific
information
strongly
suggests
capital
markets
fundamentally
efficient
wide
deviations
fundamentals
occur
omitted
scores
anomalies
market
swings
absence
new
information
prolonged
deviations
underlying
asset
values
make
market
efficiency
contestable
ever
langevoort
taming
animal
spirits
stock
markets
behavioral
approach
securities
regulation
nw
rev
dunbar
heller
anomalies
make
difficult
tell
whether
given
moment
stock
price
accurately
reflects
value
indicated
publicly
available
information
sum
economists
understand
price
impact
basic
assumed
happen
reflexively
actually
far
certain
even
markets
thus
basic
claim
common
sense
probability
support
presumption
reliance
rests
shaky
footing
basic
also
grounded
presumption
reliance
second
assumption
investor
buys
sells
stock
price
set
market
reliance
integrity
price
words
assumed
investors
transact
based
belief
market
price
accurately
reflects
underlying
security
see
urchasers
generally
rely
price
stock
reflection
basic
appears
adopted
assumption
investment
behavior
based
believed
common
sense
found
imagine
ever
buyer
seller
rely
market
integrity
knowingly
roll
dice
crooked
crap
game
rather
superficial
analysis
withstand
scrutiny
seriously
disputed
great
many
investors
buy
sell
stock
based
belief
stock
price
accurately
reflects
value
many
investors
fact
trade
opposite
reason
think
market
overvalued
stock
believe
profit
mispricing
opinion
white
see
macey
fraud
market
theory
preliminary
issues
cornell
rev
opposite
basic
assumption
appears
true
investors
attempt
locate
undervalued
stocks
effort
market
essence
betting
market
fact
inefficient
indeed
securities
transactions
often
take
place
transacting
parties
disagree
security
value
see
stout
stock
markets
costly
casinos
disagreement
market
failure
securities
regulation
rev
vailable
evidence
suggests
investor
disagreement
inspires
lion
share
equities
transactions
investors
trade
reasons
entirely
unrelated
price
instance
address
changing
liquidity
needs
tax
concerns
portfolio
balancing
requirements
see
see
also
cox
investors
may
purchase
due
portfolio
rebalancing
arising
obeisance
indexing
strategy
investment
decisions
made
indifference
price
thus
without
regard
price
integrity
odds
basic
understanding
motivates
investment
decisions
short
basic
assumption
investors
rely
common
price
integrity
simply
majority
tries
fails
reconcile
basic
assumption
investor
behavior
reality
many
investors
behave
way
basic
assumed
first
asserts
basic
rested
modest
view
rely
integrity
security
market
price
ante
quoting
basic
amgen
connecticut
retirement
plans
trust
funds
slip
emphasis
added
gloss
difficult
square
basic
plain
language
investor
buys
sells
stock
price
set
market
reliance
integrity
price
basic
see
also
hard
imagine
ever
buyer
seller
rely
market
event
neither
basic
majority
offers
anything
judicial
hunch
evidence
even
investors
rely
price
integrity
majority
also
suggests
reason
suppose
investors
buy
stock
believe
undervalued
indifferent
integrity
market
prices
ante
value
investor
according
majority
implicitly
rel
fact
stock
market
price
eventually
reflect
material
information
presumably
tr
estimate
undervalued
overvalued
particular
stock
reference
market
price
ibid
whether
majority
unsupported
claims
thought
processes
hypothetical
investors
accurate
surely
beside
point
whatever
else
investor
believes
market
simply
rely
integrity
market
price
believe
market
price
accurately
reflects
public
information
time
transacts
investor
claim
public
misstatement
induced
transaction
distorting
market
price
buy
price
believing
accurately
incorporated
public
information
sort
investor
basic
critical
fiction
falls
apart
basic
presumption
reliance
also
conflicts
recent
cases
clarifying
rule
requirements
cases
instruct
party
seeking
maintain
class
action
affirmatively
demonstrate
compliance
rule
comcast
slip
quoting
slip
prevail
motion
class
certification
party
must
demonstrate
evidentiary
proof
law
fact
common
class
members
predominate
questions
affecting
individual
members
slip
quoting
fed
rule
civ
proc
basic
permits
plaintiffs
bypass
requirement
evidentiary
proof
basic
plaintiffs
invoke
presumption
reliance
proving
predicates
deemed
met
predominance
requirement
rule
see
ante
amgen
supra
slip
basic
facilitates
class
certification
recognizing
rebuttable
presumption
classwide
reliance
basic
holding
district
appropriately
certified
class
based
presumption
reliance
invoking
basic
presumption
actually
prove
individual
questions
reliance
overwhelm
common
questions
case
basic
still
requires
showing
individual
investor
bought
sold
reliance
integrity
market
price
crucially
permits
defendants
rebut
presumption
producing
evidence
individual
plaintiffs
meet
description
see
petitioners
rebut
presumption
reliance
plaintiffs
divested
basic
shares
without
relying
integrity
market
thus
terms
basic
entitles
defendants
ask
class
member
whether
traded
reliance
integrity
market
price
inquiry
like
traditional
reliance
inquiry
inherently
individualized
questions
trading
strategies
individual
investors
generate
answers
apt
drive
resolution
litigation
stores
supra
slip
see
supra
see
also
cox
basic
recognition
defendants
rebut
presumption
proof
investor
traded
anyway
appears
require
individual
inquiries
reliance
basic
thus
exempts
rule
plaintiffs
rule
proof
requirement
plaintiffs
invoke
presumption
reliance
deemed
shown
predominance
matter
law
even
though
resulting
rebuttable
presumption
leaves
individualized
questions
reliance
case
predominance
still
unproved
needless
say
exemption
beyond
basic
power
bad
enough
basic
merely
provided
around
rule
practice
rebuttable
presumption
largely
irrebuttable
basic
ostensibly
afforded
defendants
opportunity
rebut
presumption
providing
evidence
either
aspect
plaintiff
reliance
price
impact
reliance
integrity
market
price
missing
turns
however
realities
procedure
make
rebuttal
based
individual
plaintiff
lack
reliance
virtually
impossible
stage
rebuttal
directed
class
representatives
means
counsel
needs
find
one
class
member
withstand
challenge
see
grundfest
damages
reliance
section
exchange
act
bus
lawyer
class
certification
courts
refused
allow
defendants
challenge
plaintiff
reliance
integrity
market
price
prior
determination
classwide
liability
see
brief
chamber
commerce
america
et
al
amici
curiae
collecting
cases
rejecting
postcertification
attempts
rebut
individual
class
members
reliance
price
integrity
pertinent
classwide
liability
one
search
rebuttals
grounds
turned
six
cases
thousands
rule
actions
brought
since
basic
grundfest
supra
apparent
unavailability
form
rebuttal
troubling
implications
presumption
conclusive
practice
respect
investors
reliance
price
integrity
even
basic
reliance
requirement
effectively
eliminated
presumption
attaches
reliance
element
longer
obstacle
prevailing
claim
even
though
many
class
members
transacted
reliance
price
integrity
see
supra
without
functional
reliance
requirement
essential
element
ensures
plaintiff
actually
defrauded
see
stoneridge
rule
becomes
investor
rebuttable
presumption
supposed
prevent
see
basic
supra
opinion
white
reasons
basic
overruled
favor
straightforward
rule
eliance
plaintiff
upon
defendant
deceptive
acts
actual
reliance
fictional
version
essential
element
private
cause
action
ridge
iii
principles
stare
decisis
compel
us
save
basic
muddled
logic
armchair
economics
hesitated
overrule
decisions
unworkable
badly
reasoned
payne
tennessee
theoretical
underpinnings
decisions
called
serious
question
state
oil
khan
decisions
become
irreconcilable
intervening
developments
competing
legal
doctrines
policies
patterson
mclean
credit
union
otherwise
positive
detriment
coherence
consistency
law
ibid
one
circumstances
justify
correction
bad
precedent
basic
checks
boxes
support
decision
preserve
basic
majority
contends
stare
decisis
force
respect
statutory
interpretation
remains
free
alter
done
ante
quoting
john
sand
gravel
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
basic
course
nothing
statutory
interpretation
case
concerned
evidentiary
presumption
element
implied
private
cause
action
judicial
construct
congress
enact
text
relevant
statutes
stoneridge
supra
afforded
stare
decisis
special
force
outside
context
statutory
interpretation
see
michigan
bay
mills
indian
community
thomas
dissenting
slip
good
reason
statutory
cases
perhaps
plausible
congress
watches
enactments
step
fix
mistakes
may
leave
congress
judgment
whether
interpretive
question
better
left
right
square
niagara
frontier
tariff
bureau
rationale
untenable
comes
law
like
implied
private
causes
action
retain
duty
superintend
see
exxon
shipping
baker
judiciary
wash
hands
problem
created
simply
calling
judicial
doctrine
legislative
thus
err
areas
law
presume
congress
expects
us
correct
mistakes
way
around
duty
especially
clear
rule
context
said
federal
courts
accepted
exercised
principal
responsibility
continuing
elaboration
scope
right
definition
duties
imposes
musick
peeler
garrett
employers
ins
wausau
basic
presumption
reliance
remains
mistake
correct
since
basic
congress
enacted
two
major
securities
laws
private
securities
litigation
reform
act
pslra
stat
securities
litigation
uniform
standards
act
slusa
stat
pslra
sought
combat
perceived
abuses
securities
litigation
ante
slusa
prevented
plaintiffs
avoiding
pslra
restrictions
bringing
class
actions
state
ibid
neither
acts
touched
reliance
element
implied
rule
private
cause
action
basic
presumption
contrary
respondent
argument
majority
wisely
skips
next
line
defense
draw
congress
silence
matter
inference
congress
approved
basic
begin
inappropriate
give
weight
congress
unenacted
opinion
construing
doctrines
allows
create
law
effectively
codif
based
congress
failure
address
bay
mills
supra
thomas
dissenting
slip
constitution
however
demands
laws
passed
congress
signed
president
art
adherence
basic
based
congressional
inaction
invert
requirement
insulating
error
correction
merely
congress
failed
pass
law
subject
cf
patterson
supra
congressional
inaction
amend
duly
enacted
statute
rate
arguments
legislative
inaction
speculative
best
impossible
assert
degree
assurance
congressional
failure
act
represents
affirmative
congressional
approval
one
decisions
bay
mills
supra
thomas
dissenting
slip
quoting
patterson
supra
inaction
lacks
persuasive
indeterminate
equally
tenable
inferences
may
drawn
inaction
central
bank
denver
first
interstate
bank
denver
quoting
pension
benefit
guaranty
corporation
ltv
therefore
follow
congress
failure
overturn
precedent
reason
adhere
patterson
supra
especially
true
congress
passed
law
tell
us
draw
inference
inaction
pslra
expressly
othing
act
shall
deemed
create
ratify
implied
private
right
action
notes
following
act
ratify
even
rule
private
cause
action
read
ratify
sub
silentio
presumption
reliance
affixed
action
pslra
slusa
operate
curtail
abuses
various
private
causes
action
securities
laws
hardly
indication
congress
approved
basic
expansion
private
cause
action
congress
failure
overturn
basic
permit
us
place
shoulders
congress
burden
error
girouard
basic
took
implied
cause
action
grafted
presumption
reliance
based
nascent
economic
theory
personal
intuitions
investment
behavior
result
unrecognizably
broad
cause
action
ready
made
class
certification
time
experience
pointed
error
decision
making
clear
attempt
revise
securities
law
fit
alleged
new
realities
financial
markets
left
congress
opinion
white
footnotes
private
rule
action
evolved
drawn
action
deceit
identify
six
elements
private
plaintiff
must
prove
material
misrepresentation
omission
defendant
scienter
connection
misrepresentation
omission
purchase
sale
security
reliance
upon
misrepresentation
omission
economic
loss
loss
causation
amgen
connecticut
retirement
plans
trust
funds
slip
years
preceding
basic
lower
courts
commentators
experimented
various
ways
facilitate
class
actions
relaxing
eliminating
reliance
element
implied
action
see
blackie
barrack
note
theory
harv
rev
note
reliance
requirement
private
actions
sec
rule
harv
rev
theory
umbrella
term
varied
efforts
black
fraud
market
criticism
dispensing
reliance
requirements
certain
open
market
transactions
rev
investor
invoke
presumption
demonstrating
certain
predicates
public
statement
efficient
market
shares
traded
statement
made
truth
revealed
statement
material
basic
weak
form
hypothesis
provides
investor
earn
return
trading
historical
price
data
see
dunbar
heller
fraud
market
meets
behavioral
finance
del
corporate
hereinafter
dunbar
heller
strong
form
provides
investors
achieve
returns
even
trading
nonpublic
information
see
ibid
weak
form
generally
accepted
strong
form
see
ibid
basic
mistaken
intuition
investor
behavior
appears
involve
category
mistake
invoked
hypothesis
meant
describe
markets
used
one
way
meant
used
predictor
behavior
individual
investors
langevoort
theories
assumptions
securities
regulation
market
efficiency
revisited
rev
efficient
capital
markets
hypothesis
describe
investors
behave
suggests
consequences
collective
behavior
cox
nothing
hypothesis
denies
popular
accounts
assume
much
information
searching
trading
investors
institutions
done
perhaps
erroneous
belief
undervalued
overvalued
stocks
exist
systematically
discovered
langevoort
theories
supra
majority
suggests
basic
squares
comcast
behrend
stores
dukes
relieve
plaintiffs
burden
proving
predominance
rather
sets
forth
must
prove
demonstrate
predominance
ante
argument
misses
point
basic
offers
defendants
chance
rebut
presumption
individualized
grounds
predicates
basic
sets
forth
sufficient
invoke
presumption
necessarily
prove
predominance
absence
postcertification
rebuttal
likely
attributable
part
substantial
terrorem
settlement
pressures
brought
bear
certification
see
nagareda
class
certification
age
aggregate
proof
rev
vanishingly
rare
exception
class
certification
sets
litigation
path
toward
resolution
way
settlement
testing
plaintiffs
case
trial
see
also
stoneridge
investment
partners
llc
xtensive
discovery
potential
uncertainty
disruption
lawsuit
allow
plaintiffs
weak
claims
extort
settlements
innocent
companies
course
today
decision
makes
clear
defendant
may
rebut
presumption
producing
evidence
misstatement
issue
failed
affect
market
price
security
see
ante
parts
basic
version
reliance
key
fiction
investor
indirectly
relied
misstatement
unavailability
rebuttal
respect
one
parts
still
functionally
removes
reliance
element
proof