Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Securities

  • January 09, 2026

    Judge Dismisses Claims Over Most Of Alleged Misstatements In Stock-Drop Suit

    CHICAGO — A federal judge in Illinois dismissed investors’ claims against Walgreens Boots Alliance and several of its current and former executives as to numerous alleged misstatements the company made regarding its primary care clinic venture, leaving the claims as to only three alleged misstatements; the judge found the majority of the alleged misstatements not to be false or misleading.

  • January 09, 2026

    9th Circuit Finds Investors Provided Plausible Claims Against Digital Platform

    PASADENA, Calif. — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel reversed in part a lower court’s dismissal of an investor’s class action against a digital experience platform, certain executives and directors, and underwriters for allegedly providing misleading statements in its public offering documents, finding that the complaint contained plausible allegations.

  • January 09, 2026

    Investors, Online Home-Selling Company Reach $39M Settlement In Stock-Drop Suit

    PHOENIX — A federal judge in Arizona granted final approval to a $39 million settlement in a suit brought by retirement funds alleging that an online home-selling company made false statements about its artificial intelligence-powered pricing algorithm that the retirement funds alleged resulted in the funds’ losses.

  • January 09, 2026

    5th Circuit Won’t Rehear Decision To Allow Division Of Investor Subclasses

    NEW ORLEANS — A  Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel denied investors’ petition for panel rehearing and petition for rehearing en banc, deciding not to reconsider its decision to affirm a district court’s order that partially granted and partially denied class certification in its securities fraud class action against an offshore development company.

  • January 09, 2026

    9th Circuit Won’t Rehear Case Alleging Tesla Misled About Self-Driving Technology

    SAN FRANCISCO — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel denied investors’ petition for panel rehearing of the panel’s memorandum affirming a lower court’s decision to dismiss their complaint against Tesla Inc. and Elon Musk for violating federal securities law by allegedly misrepresenting the safety, capability and development of the company’s autonomous driving technology; the panel had found that the investors failed to allege falsity or scienter.

  • January 08, 2026

    Loan Servicer: 7th Circuit Wrong To Prioritize Individuals In Ponzi Liquidation

    CHICAGO — A loan servicer asked a panel of the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reconsider its decision to affirm an Illinois federal judge’s decision to award priority to individual investors to receive proceeds from the liquidation of assets related to a Ponzi scheme, arguing that the panel’s decision expanded Illinois’ doctrine of equitable mortgages beyond existing precedent.

  • January 08, 2026

    9th Circuit: Evidence Properly Excluded During Trial On Investment Fraud Claims

    PASADENA, Calif. — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a lower court’s judgment after a jury found in favor of investors in their case against two investment advisers and their investment adviser firm for violating federal securities laws, finding that the lower court did not err in excluding evidence regarding certain investment accounts for being irrelevant to the claims.

  • January 07, 2026

    2nd Circuit Finds Channel-Stuffing Suit Fails To Allege Scheme Liability

    NEW YORK — A Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed the dismissal of a putative securities class action brought by investors alleging that an advanced driver-assistance systems technology company and its executives made misleading statements about the company’s minimum-order contracts that the investors claimed artificially inflated the price of the company’s stock; the panel found that the investors didn’t allege that material misstatements were made that would support scheme liability.

  • January 06, 2026

    High Court Asked If RICO Claim Can Be Brought If Securities Claim Is Not Alleged

    WASHINGTON, D.C.  — A financial institution issued a reply brief in support of its petition for a writ of certiorari asking the U.S. Supreme Court “to interpret a statutory provision that bars a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act plaintiff from ‘rely[ing] upon any conduct that would have been actionable as fraud in the purchase or sale of securities to establish’ a RICO violation,” arguing that an 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel was wrong to determine that the statute turns on whether the particular plaintiff would have a viable securities suit.

  • December 24, 2025

    Man: Anti-SLAPP Ruling Contains Errors That Are The Hallmark Of AI Use

    SAN FRANCISCO — Errors in citations and wording in an order granting anti-strategic lawsuits against public participation (anti-SLAPP) motions show that a court used artificial intelligence in crafting the improper ruling, a man suing Elon Musk and Tesla Inc. for securities fraud and defamation says in seeking reconsideration.

  • December 23, 2025

    Delaware Supreme Court Finds Rescission Of Musk’s Tesla $56B Pay Package Improper

    DOVER, Del. — The Supreme Court of Delaware, sitting en banc¸ reversed a lower court’s rescission of Elon Musk’s $56 billion pay package in a shareholder’s derivative suit, finding that rescission was an improper remedy because Musk couldn’t be restored to the status quo ante.

  • December 18, 2025

    SEC Asks High Court To Address Recurring Question About Disgorgement Authority

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Securities and Exchange Commission urged the U.S. Supreme Court on Dec. 17 to grant an individual’s petition for a writ of certiorari to determine whether the SEC is required to show that investors suffered pecuniary harm when asking for a disgorgement award, saying that “the question presented is recurring and important; and this case is a suitable vehicle for resolving the conflict.”

  • December 18, 2025

    7th Circuit Gives Priority To Individual Investors In Ponzi Liquidation

    CHICAGO — A Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed an Illinois federal judge’s decision to award priority to individual investors over a loan servicer to receive proceeds from the liquidation of assets related to a Ponzi scheme, finding that the loan servicer had inquiry notice of the individual investors’ interest in the assets.

  • December 08, 2025

    COMMENTARY: Global Class Action Litigation: Causes, Effects, And What’s Next

    By Guillaume Buell and John Coyle

  • December 17, 2025

    Magistrate Approves $2.25M Settlement Between Chinese Company, Investors

    NEWARK, N.J. — A federal magistrate judge in New Jersey approved a $2.25 million settlement between investors and a Chinese livestreaming platform and two of its executives in a securities class action brought by the investors for alleged violations of federal securities laws after the company’s American depository shares price dropped after information was released regarding a Chinese authority’s investigations into alleged criminal activity.

  • December 12, 2025

    Executive Order Requires Evaluation Of Influence Of Foreign-Owned Proxy Advisers

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — On Dec. 11, President Donald J. Trump issued an executive order seeking to protect investors and pensions from politicized advice from foreign-owned proxy advisers.

  • December 11, 2025

    Congress’ Intent In ICA Private Right Of Action Case Debated Before High Court

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Dec. 10 heard oral arguments in a case between closed-end funds (CEFs) and a hedge fund, with the CEFs asking it to determine whether the CEFs violated the Investment Company Act of 1940 (ICA) and whether Congress intended there to be a private right of action in Section 47(b) of the ICA.

  • December 11, 2025

    Insurer’s Reconsideration Bid Denied In Suit Over Forced Deal Involving Reinsurer

    NEW YORK — A New York federal judge denied an insurer’s motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of its federal securities law claims, finding that the insurer failed to identify any controlling authority or factual matter the court overlooked and that the insurer’s allegations of domestic misrepresentations and closing-related conduct tied to the court-compelled April 2024 purchase of JRG Reinsurance Co. Ltd.’s equity did not alter the conclusion that the claims are impermissibly extraterritorial.

  • December 09, 2025

    High Court Grants Motion To Dismiss SPA Suit After Settlement

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Dec. 8 granted an aerospace company’s motion to dismiss the company’s petition for a writ of certiorari in its case seeking to void a stock purchase agreement (SPA) with a hedge fund alleging the hedge fund violated federal securities laws by not registering as a dealer; the company moved to dismiss its petition after the parties reached a settlement.

  • December 05, 2025

    Petitioner’s Supporters Urge High Court To Solve Split On SEC Disgorgement Issue

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Appellants in another case regarding a substantial disgorgement award, a public-policy research foundation and a not-for-profit mutual benefit corporation all urged the U.S. Supreme Court to grant an individual’s petition for a writ of certiorari to determine whether the Securities and Exchange Commission is required to show that investors suffered pecuniary harm when asking for a disgorgement award, urging the court to address the split between circuit courts on this issue.

  • December 05, 2025

    9th Circuit Finds Shareholder Failed To Allege Securities Fraud Against Adidas

    SAN FRANCISCO — A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of a shareholder’s securities fraud suit against Adidas AG and two of its executives over alleged misstatements about the impact of the dissolution of a celebrity partnership, agreeing with the lower court that the shareholder failed to allege securities fraud claims.

  • December 05, 2025

    Settlement Between Microturbine Manufacturing Executives, Investors Approved

    LOS ANGELES — A federal judge in California granted final approval to a $2.25 million settlement between investors and former executives of a microturbine manufacturer who the investors alleged defrauded investors by making false or misleading statements regarding the company’s revenue.

  • December 05, 2025

    Judge Dismisses Case But Won’t Compel Arbitration Over Cryptocurrency Investment

    MIAMI — A federal judge in Florida denied a cryptocurrency platform creator’s motion to compel an entrepreneur to arbitrate the entrepreneur’s complaint against him for breach of fiduciary duty, negligent misrepresentation and violation of Florida’s securities laws after losing $1 million he invested in the platform, finding the platform did not put the entrepreneur on notice of the arbitration provision; however, the judge granted the creator’s motion to dismiss the entrepreneur’s claims for failure to state a claim.

  • December 05, 2025

    Investors Granted Partial Summary Judgment In Dispute Over Cryptocurrency Sale

    ORLANDO, Fla. — A federal judge granted partial summary judgment to investors who sued the trustee of a cryptocurrency and the company that managed the cryptocurrency for selling the cryptocurrency without filing a registration statement, finding that the investors met the first two prongs of the test established under Secs. & Exch. Comm’n v. W.J. Howey Co. but that there was a dispute over whether the promotional materials for the cryptocurrency “attracted Plaintiffs with an expectation of profits.”

  • December 04, 2025

    3rd Circuit Won’t Rehear Finding Investors Didn’t Plausibly Allege Misstatements

    PHILADELPHIA — A Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel denied investors’ petition to rehear its decision affirming a lower court’s dismissal of the investors’ class action complaint against a health care company and two of its executives for allegedly issuing misleading statements that caused the company’s stock to drop, finding the investors failed to plausibly allege that the challenged statements were materially misleading by omission.