Bergeson, LLP Affiliated Counsel Jared L. Kopel’s Article “Viewpoint: In Haliburton Ruling, A Few Tweaks, But No Overhaul Of Securities Class Actions” Featured In The Recorder
Mr. Kopel’s article “Viewpoint: In Halliburton Ruling, A Few Tweaks, But No Overhaul Of Securities Class Actions,” featured in the online edition of The Recorder. Mr. Kopel takes a look at the long awaited decision in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund, which had the potential to end securities class action litigation as it has been practiced for the last 30 years. However, the court essentially maintained the status quo, but altered the litigation landscape, which allows defendants to rebut at the class certification stage the presumption of reliance embraced 26 years ago in Basic v. Levinson, 485 U.S. 224 (1988). In the majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by five other justices, the court methodically addresses the arguments advanced by Halliburton and a multitude of amicus briefs, then rejected Halliburton’s two arguments that Basic rested on premises that were no longer viable. The first argument being that Halliburton asserted the efficient market theory had lost its intellectual vitality since Basic, given evidence showing public information was not always embedded immediately in stock prices; and the second argument that Halliburton contended that many investors no longer rely on the purported integrity of the market to accurately set prices. In a concurring opinion joined by Justices Scalia and Alito, Justice Thomas argued that Basic presumption of reliance should be overruled for all the reasons rejected by the majority.