Categories
- Administrative law (3,493)
- Admiralty-Maritime Law (2,514)
- Advertising Law (2,069)
- Antitrust – Competition law (735)
- Aviation Law (959)
- Banking and Finance law (1,951)
- Bankruptcy Law (1,397)
- Business law (2,076)
- Constitutional Law (688)
- Contract Law (44)
- Copyright Law (1,415)
- Corporate Law (1,455)
- Criminal Law (1,149)
- Divorce Law (2,187)
- Elder Law (117)
- Employment and Labour Law (1,216)
- Environmental Law (653)
- Estate Planning (691)
- Family Law (1,070)
- General Legal News (225)
- Health Law (1,261)
- Immigration law (883)
- Injury & Accident Law (1,390)
- Insurance (664)
- Intellectual Property (1,357)
- International Law (569)
- Judiciary (562)
- Law Librarians (1,800)
- Law Professors (1,118)
- Law Students (993)
- Legal Ethics (306)
- Legal Marketing (1,086)
- Legal Theory (707)
- Medical malpractice law (1,204)
- Products Liability (847)
- Real Estate & Property Law (938)
- Securities Law (734)
- Seogpst (2)
- Tax Law (1,059)
- Technology & Cyberlaw (1,526)
- World (729)
- Germany (3)
- Writings and Citations (4)
Tag Archives: Cyan
Guest Post: The State of Securities Litigation After Cyan
As I noted at the time, on March 20, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its unanimous decision in Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund, holding that state courts retain concurrent jurisdiction for liability actions under the Securities … Continue reading
Guest Post: After Cyan — Some Prognostications
Boris Feldman Ignacio Salceda As I discussed in a post last week, on March 20, 2018 the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund that the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 … Continue reading
Cyan Makes SLUSA Removal Proponents Feel Blue: Supreme Court Holds That Securities Act of 1933 Class Actions Can Stay in State Court
On March 20, the Supreme Court reached two holdings important to securities litigators. First, the Court held that the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (“SLUSA”) did not strip state courts of their ability to adjudicate class actions under … Continue reading
