SLUSASecurities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998
References in periodicals archive ?
In 2014, the Roberts Court returned to interpreting SLUSA again in
Congress's adoption of SLUSA reflected similar objectives and enhanced the effectiveness of the PSLRA reforms.
The reason that this time period was chosen is because SLUSA and Regulation FD passage took place during this period (1998 and 2000 respectively).
Given that the majority of constraints in issuing a voluntary earnings forecast, as exhibited in extant literature, still apply to both study periods, one major condition that has changed between the two sample periods is the enactment of SLUSA.
Dabit rejected the plaintiffs' arguments and extended SLUSA preemption to holder actions, distinguishing Blue Chip Stamps.
This may very well provide the opportunity for the Supreme Court to intervene and decide in a more uniform way what Cyin connection with' is intended to mean under SLUSA.
In October 2011, Dallas federal judge David Godbey ruled that SLUSA preempted the state law class-action litigation, noting that many investors sold securities to invest in the CDs, but the 5th U.
SLUSA generally limits state causes of action for secondary liability to individual plaintiffs or classes of fifty or fewer.
So in 1998, Congress passed SLUSA as an attempt to stop plaintiffs from circumventing the PSLRA.
Because both the misconduct complained of, and the harm incurred, rests on and arises from securities transactions, SLUSA applies.
296) The issue on appeal was whether Congress had intended SLUSA to preempt such actions brought in state courts.
Specifically, SLUSA makes it more difficult for investors to frustrate the application of PSLRA by bringing class action lawsuits in state courts.