Argument Preview: Under SEC Rule 10b-5, must a plaintiff allege that a stock issuerâ€™s omissions were statistically significant?
On January 10, in Matrixx Initiatives v. Siracusano, the Court will hear oral argument regarding whether a drug company violates federal securities laws by failing to disclose reports of patients having adverse reactions to its drugs when the number of incidents is not statistically significant. Jayne Zanglein, who teaches business law at Western Carolina University, and Matthew Sullivan, a recent business administration and law graduate from Western Carolina, preview the case for the American Bar Association's PREVIEW of U.S. Supreme Court Cases; the ABA has generously agreed to share some of its previews "“ which are authored by practitioners and scholars in the field "“ with SCOTUSblog. You can read Professor Zanglein and Mr. Sullivan's preview here; PREVIEW's website is here.
Recommended Citation: Adam Schlossman, Argument Preview: Under SEC Rule 10b-5, must a plaintiff allege that a stock issuerâ€™s omissions were statistically significant?, SCOTUSblog (Jan. 7, 2011, 7:14 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2011/01/argument-preview-argument-preview-under-sec-rule-10b-5-must-a-plaintiff-allege-that-a-stock-issuer%e2%80%99s-omissions-were-statistically-significant/