Subscribe
‘Enforcement 40’ for 2020
Our Sponsors
Join Us On LinkedIn
Join the Securities Litigation and Enforcement Group on LinkedInSecurities Docket News Wire for April 3, 2009
New Type of Madoff Defendant Emerges: Account Custodian. http://is.gd/qC2t # Warrior Stock of the Day: Changyou.com. http://is.gd/qubv # Former Gen Re finite exec gets 18-month sentence. http://is.gd/qu5T # Dreier Receiver to Seek $1.4 Million in Fees. http://is.gd/qu5p # The Retek Decision: A Case Study on Loss Causation at Summary Judgment. http://is.gd/qu54 # Satyam’s Raju faces […]
Web Watch: Best Blog Posts and Columns For the Week Ending April 3
Here is the weekly summary for Securities Docket’s Web Watch (”This Week’s Best Blog Posts and Columns”): WSJ LAW BLOG (April 2, 2009): ‘Dangling in the Wind’: A Closer Look at Asset Freezes “At some point, you have to ask whether a freeze is fair to a civil defendant who otherwise is left dangling in […]
Warrior Stock of the Day: Changyou.com
Online video games maker Changyou.com successfully completed its initial public offering yesterday, and closed up 25 percent in its trading debut. Reuters reports that the company, whose ADRs are now traded on Nasdaq, had the most successful stock launch in nearly a year, and was only the third IPO in the U.S. since August 2008. […]
Dreier Receiver to Seek $1.4 Million in Fees
The bill for the court-appointed receiver and his attorneys in the SEC’s case against Marc S. Dreier is in. Mark Pomerantz said he expects to seek $150,000, while his counsel at Paul Weiss will ask for approximately $1.25 million for their four months of work. The NY Law Journal reports that Paul Weiss is accepting […]
Guest Column — The Retek Decision: A Case Study on Loss Causation at Summary Judgment
Guest columnist Richard Gallagher writes about a recent order by the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota granting summary judgment to the defense on loss causation grounds in In re Retek Inc. Securities Litigation. On the basis of the court’s loss causation analysis, the court dismissed all of the remaining claims in the case, which arose under Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the 1934 Act. The Court’s ruling is significant because it provides a thorough review of loss causation principles as they apply at the summary judgment stage, as opposed to the pleading stage.