Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit analyzed the "scienter" requirement that a shareholder must meet to prevail under the federal securities laws in showing that the company or its executives fraudulently induced the shareholder to buy or retain shares. KBC Asset Management v. DXC Technology Co., No. 20-1718 (4th Cir., Dec. 1, 2021). The company or executives act with "scienter" only when they have a certain fraudulent state of mind, intending to mislead or being extremely careless about misleading shareholders. As the Fourth Circuit decision shows, shareholders must meet a high bar in demonstrating scienter to avoid early dismissal of the case. The decision also shows the fact-intensive approach courts use to distinguish fraudulent statements from those that, even if mistaken, were made innocently.
|DXC is a publicly traded IT company. Throughout 2017, the company successfully used cost-cutting measures to achieve its financial goals. In February 2018, DXC issued a press release touting its continued financial success. By November 2018, however, it had revised its projected revenue guidance to shareholders downward by around $800 million. The company's share price dropped as a result.
The plaintiffs in this case were a group of shareholders who had acquired shares in DXC between February and November 2018. The plaintiffs alleged that the company knew, contrary to its public statements in February 2018, that its cost-cutting measures during the course of 2018 would inhibit its ability to generate revenue. The plaintiffs claimed DXC and its two principal executives fraudulently induced the plaintiffs to acquire stock through its material misstatements and omissions about the company's financial health. The plaintiffs brought federal securities fraud claims against the company and the two executives under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.
The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.
As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.