This week, the Ninth Circuit examines how the loss-causation requirement of a securities-fraud claim may be satisfied in cases involving FOIA disclosures, and considers the application of Younger v. Harris to a State civil-enforcement action pressed by private counsel.
DAVID GRIGSBY v. BOFI HOLDING, INC.The Court holds that information obtained through the Freedom of Information Act can constitute a corrective disclosure for purposes of alleging loss causation in a securities-fraud action.
Panel: Judges Murguia, Christen, and Hellerstein (S.D.N.Y.), with Judge Christen writing the opinion.
Key highlight: Plaintiffs may rely on a corrective disclosure derived from a FOIA response by plausibly alleging that the FOIA information had not been previously disclosed. If a plaintiff relies on information obtained via a FOIA request, the pleading burden to allege loss causation is no different from the pleading burden for other types of corrective disclosures.
Background: Plaintiffs filed a putative class action on behalf of shareholders alleging that BofI Holding, Inc. and its executives violated securities law by, among other things, denying that the company was being investigated for money laundering. To prove loss causation, plaintiffs pointed to a news article that revealed the existence of an SEC investigation through a FOIA request and that immediately preceded a drop in the companys stock price. The district court dismissed the suit on the ground that information obtained under FOIA was, as a matter of law, publicly available prior to its disclosure, and thus could not be a corrective disclosure of a misrepresentation.
Result: The Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part. The Court began by explaining that a securities fraud plaintiff can satisfy the loss-causation pleading burden by alleging that a corrective disclosure revealed the truth of a defendants misrepresentation and thereby caused the companys stock price to drop and investors to lose money. In general, the Court continued, a disclosure is not corrective if it contains information derived entirely from public filings and other publicly available sources of which the stock market was presumed to be aware. BofI had argued that the investigation was already reflected in its stock price before the article was published because the information was discoverable through FOIA. The Court rejected that approach for two reasons: First, FOIA information is not generally available, but must be specifically requested. And second, because the government may invoke exceptions to FOIA, certain information may never come to light. At a minimum, the Court said, there must be some indication that the relevant information was requested and produced before the information contained in a FOIA response can be considered publicly available for purposes of loss causation.
The Court went on to conclude that plaintiffs had adequately alleged that the investigation into BofI had not been publicly disclosed prior to publication of the news article. It was enough that the plaintiffs had alleged that the [news] article disclosed BofI had been the subject of a formal SEC investigation, that the article revealed the falsity of BofIs prior statement, and that the revelation caused BofIs stock price to drop. Plaintiffs were not required to make an additional showing that no one else had obtained the same information through FOIA before the articles publication, and documents showing five other BofI-related FOIA requests did not render the initial allegations implausible.
The Court also concluded that the news article was corrective of BofIs allegedly false statement, rejecting BofIs argument that the article did not establish that it knew about the investigation. Nonetheless, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district courts separate conclusion that a different news article was not a corrective disclosure with respect to another allegedly false statement because the article contained only public information, and did not require any expertise or specialized skills beyond what a typical market participant would possess. Finally, the Court declined to consider whether plaintiffs adequately pleaded scienter because the district court did not reach that issue.
BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY v. CONNORSThe Court holds that Younger v. Harris precludes a federal-court challenge to a state-court civil enforcement proceeding, even where that state-court prosecution is led by private counsel and allegedly profit-driven.
The panel: Judges Watford, Friedland, and Miller, with Judge Miller writing the opinion.
Key highlight:"Conducting litigation on behalf of a State is a core sovereign function, and the people of each State, through their elected representatives, have the right to decide whether that function should be carried out by full-time government employees or, as here, by outside counsel retained for a particular case."
Background: The State of Hawaii filed suit in Hawaii state court against a variety of pharmaceutical companies. The State asserted that the defendants advertising of the drug Plavix had been misleading given the drugs allegedly reduced effectiveness in people with a genetic variation particularly prevalent among those of Asian or Pacific Islander descent. The State retained two private law firms on a contingency-fee basis in bringing this suit.
The pharmaceutical companies then sued the State in federal court, seeking an injunction against the state-court proceedings, which the companies claimed violated their First Amendment rights. The district court dismissed, invoking Younger abstention.
Result: The Ninth Circuit affirmed. As the Court explained, while federal courts have a virtually unflagging obligation to hear all cases within their jurisdiction, Younger establishes an exception to that obligation when the federal-court plaintiff seeks to enjoin certain types of civil enforcement proceedings that are akin to criminal prosecutions. The Court dismissed the companies arguments that this exception was not applicable here.
First, the Court rejected the contention that the state-court action was not in fact brought by the State because the State was relying on private counsel. As the Court explained, it is up to the State to decide who will represent it in court (or elsewhere), and thus the Court saw no reason why the application of Younger should turn on the States choice of lawyers. Rather, what mattered was that the Attorney General of Hawaii made the decision to bring the action, and the people of Hawaii may hold her accountable for that decision.
Next, the Court rejected the contention that the case was not a civil enforcement action because private counsel had conducted most of the underlying investigation, and the State was purportedly motivated by profit rather than any desire to punish wrongdoing. The Court concluded that what was relevant, for Younger purposes, was not the States interest in any particular case, but rather its interest in a given class of proceedings. After all, [a] federal-court inquiry into why a state attorney general chose to pursue a particular case, or into the thoroughness of the States pre-filing investigation, would be entirely at odds with Youngers purpose of leaving state governments free to perform their separate functions in their separate ways. And here, the Court held, the State sought to recover civil penalties for an alleged violation of a statute punishing deception, bring the proceeding comfortably within the general class of proceedings to which Younger applies.
Finally, the Court rejected the argument that because the companies First Amendment rights were at issue, the Court should apply special scrutiny, reasoning that Younger abstention routinely applies even when important rights are at stake. Because the companies claim did not fall within the narrow exception for cases of proven harassment . . . by state officials in bad faith, it was properly dismissed.
[View source.]
Continue reading here:
This Week at The Ninth: Public Knowledge and Private Counsel - JD Supra
- Supreme Court revives NRA's lawsuit alleging that New York violated its First Amendment rights - POLITICO - June 2nd, 2024
- Opinion | The NRA deserved its First Amendment win at the Supreme Court - The Washington Post - The Washington Post - June 2nd, 2024
- Why Justice Sotomayor just handed the NRA a big Supreme Court victory - Vox.com - June 2nd, 2024
- NRA v. Vullo: A Big First Amendment Win at the High Court - Cato Institute - June 2nd, 2024
- Theres a First Amendment right to express Second Amendment views - Washington Examiner - June 2nd, 2024
- Unanimous First Amendment Victory for the NRA (Represented by the ACLU) - Reason - June 2nd, 2024
- In a Victory for Assange and First Amendment, UK Court Grants Right to Appeal Truthout - Truthout - June 2nd, 2024
- Supreme Court Says Government Bullying Can Violate the First Amendment - Goldwater Institute - June 2nd, 2024
- Preemption, the First Amendment, and Ineffective Assistance of Counsel on Todays Decisional Menu - SCOTUS Today - The National Law Review - June 2nd, 2024
- University of Michigan police officers suspension violated First Amendment, jury finds - MLive.com - June 2nd, 2024
- SCOTUS Unanimously Sides With NRA in First Amendment Case - The Reload - June 2nd, 2024
- Video is at the center of First Amendment case against North East School District - GoErie.com - June 2nd, 2024
- NRA gets 1st Amendment win as Supreme Court blasts NY official who pressured banks to cut ties with gun lobby - The Independent - June 2nd, 2024
- Cleveland Cliffs and its CEO should put on the big boy pants and stop going against the 1st Amendment: Today - cleveland.com - June 2nd, 2024
- TikToks Future in U.S. Depends on Bet on First Amendment - The New York Times - May 15th, 2024
- Opinion | Campus protests, young people and importance of the First Amendment - Bridge Michigan - May 15th, 2024
- Shielded Speech: Exploring the First Amendment in Anonymous Online Discourse - Disruptive Competition Project - May 15th, 2024
- The 8 First Amendment cases the Supreme Court will decide this term - Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression - May 15th, 2024
- Umut Bayramoglu: The night the First Amendment died on Jayhawk Boulevard, and why you should care (Column) - The Lawrence Times - May 15th, 2024
- Court dismisses First Amendment lawsuit filed against Palomar Health by one of its directors - The San Diego Union-Tribune - May 15th, 2024
- Yolo County group gets settlement with county over 1st Amendment - ABC10.com KXTV - May 15th, 2024
- TikTok creators sue to block law that could lead to a ban - The Washington Post - May 15th, 2024
- Letter to the Editor: That remarkable First Amendment Muddy River News - Muddy River News - May 15th, 2024
- TikTok sues the US over attempts to force its Chinese parent to sell the social media platform, citing First Amendment - ABC News - May 15th, 2024
- Sunday Business Page: Campus protests and the First Amendment - CBS Pittsburgh - May 15th, 2024
- First Amendment protections for public comment at government meetings - Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression - May 15th, 2024
- Survey shows: Most Americans are concerned about the future of free speech - Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression - May 15th, 2024
- First Amendment argument 'not in play' with TikTok bill rebuttal: Ajit Pai - Fox Business - May 15th, 2024
- On resistance, revolution, and dissent campus protests in 44 states and the District of Columbia First Amendment ... - Foundation for Individual... - May 15th, 2024
- The Antisemitism Controversy Shows the Wisdom of the First Amendment The Future of Freedom Foundation - The Future of Freedom Foundation - May 15th, 2024
- Hate speech, the First Amendment and the college conundrum - The Hill - January 15th, 2024
- Big Oil Is Weaponizing The First Amendment - The Lever - January 15th, 2024
- Robert Post: 'There is growing pessimism about the future of free speech in the United States' First Amendment ... - Foundation for Individual Rights... - January 15th, 2024
- Court sends case of prosecutor suspended by DeSantis back to trial judge over First Amendment issues - The Associated Press - January 15th, 2024
- Professor's Lawyers Argue: Private University Student Newspapers Are Not Entitled to First Amendment Protection - Reason - January 15th, 2024
- Appeals court says DeSantis violated Andrew Warren's First Amendment rights - Creative Loafing Tampa - January 15th, 2024
- Lawsuit Over UC Santa Cruz's Diversity Statements Dismissed on Standing Grounds - Reason - January 15th, 2024
- First Amendment claim struck down in Project Veritas case focused on diary of Biden's daughter - The Associated Press - December 28th, 2023
- First Amendment claim struck down in Project Veritas case focused on diary of Biden's daughter - NBC News - December 28th, 2023
- Project Veritas's First Amendment Claim to the Diary of Biden's Daughter Denied By Judge - Vanity Fair - December 28th, 2023
- Veritas' First Amendment claim in Biden's daughter's diary rejected by judge - Axios - December 28th, 2023
- 2023 Year in Review: The U.S. Supreme Court's Busy Year of Free Speech and Tech Cases - EFF - December 28th, 2023
- Cook County Sheriffs Office accused of retaliation and First Amendment violations - Chicago Reporter - December 28th, 2023
- The Religious Liberty Step Too Far That Could Destroy the Common Good If We Let It - Justia Verdict - December 28th, 2023
- First Amendment Likely Protects Even Unlicensed Engineers' Right to Provide Expert Opinion in Government ... - Reason - December 28th, 2023
- Social Media Censorship and The First Amendment - Reason - December 28th, 2023
- Voices from the State University of New York at Fredonia: Banning of books contradicts our First Amendment - Evening Observer - December 28th, 2023
- 1st Amendment claim struck down in Project Veritas case focused on diary of Biden's daughter - Santa Fe New Mexican - December 28th, 2023
- Project Veritas First Amendment | US and World News | wvnews.com - WV News - December 28th, 2023
- 1st Amendment claim struck down in Project Veritas case focused on diary of Biden's daughter - News10NBC - December 28th, 2023
- 1st Amendment claim struck down in Project Veritas case focused on diary of Biden's daughter - WAND - December 28th, 2023
- First Amendment Claim Rejected in Project Veritas Case Focused on Diary of Biden's Daughter - NEWSnet media - December 28th, 2023
- Trump Demands Dismissal Of GA RICO Citing First Amendment Right To Ask Politicians To Do Crimes - Above the Law - December 20th, 2023
- Courts Are Choosing TikTok Over Children - The Atlantic - December 20th, 2023
- Legislators Don't Have First Amendment Right Not to Show Up to Legislature - Reason - December 20th, 2023
- These university presidents need to go back to school on the First Amendment - Washington Examiner - December 20th, 2023
- Is saying 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free' protected speech under the First Amendment? - Foundation for Individual Rights in... - December 20th, 2023
- UPDATE: Annapolis First Amendment Auditor Sentenced to 90 Days for Criminal Trespassing at Calvert Health ... - Southern Maryland News Net - December 20th, 2023
- Free Speech and "Harassment Restraining Orders" - Reason - December 20th, 2023
- East Lansing ordered to pay farm more than $800000 in First Amendment lawsuit - WKAR - December 20th, 2023
- RCFP urges SCOTUS to reverse ruling in First Amendment retaliation case - Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press - December 20th, 2023
- What are the legal, practical bounds of free speech on college campuses? - University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign - December 20th, 2023
- Standing Guard | SCOTUS To Hear First Amendment Case | An Official Journal Of The NRA - America's 1st Freedom - December 20th, 2023
- What the college presidents got wrong about the First Amendment - WBUR News - December 20th, 2023
- Big win for the First Amendment in Virginia - Washington Examiner - December 20th, 2023
- Trump, in filing, asks judge to dismiss 'invalid' Georgia election interference charges - ABC News - December 20th, 2023
- First Amendment Auditor Sentenced To 90 Days In Jail For Criminal Trespass In Calvert County - Bay Net - December 20th, 2023
- The Bill of Rights Super-Quiz Civic Nebraska - Civic Nebraska - December 20th, 2023
- Second Amendment Roundup: Second Circuit Opines on New York's Gun Restrictions - Reason - December 20th, 2023
- Opinion | University presidents get schooled in free speech and antisemitism - The Washington Post - December 20th, 2023
- Is the racist tirade in a viral TikTok out of Midvale protected by the First Amendment? - KUTV 2News - December 20th, 2023
- Judge rejects town's ban on 'thin blue line' flag: 'Resounding win for the First Amendment' - Alabama's News Leader - November 17th, 2023
- An unprecedented First Amendment issue: Trump cites gag order appeal as reason for Thanksgiving extension to support three-pronged attack on Jack... - November 17th, 2023
- Trump strangely not mentioned during SCOTUS hearing on First Amendment case over encouraging violations of federal law - Law & Crime - March 31st, 2023
- Werewolf Therapeutics - On March 16, Entered Into A First ... - Kalkine Media - March 23rd, 2023
- Lawmakers submit more than 140 amendments as House opens process for first time in seven years - The Hill - January 30th, 2023
- National organization wants to join legal fight over Beachwood, police chiefs efforts to unmask anonymous cr - cleveland.com - January 30th, 2023
- Bill of Rights | The First Amendment Encyclopedia - January 22nd, 2023
- 10 Facts About the First Amendment and Elections - January 22nd, 2023
- Freedom of Speech - Origins, First Amendment & Limits - HISTORY - January 22nd, 2023