Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Dabit
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Dabit, 547 U.S. 71 (2006), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the extent to which state law securities fraud class action claims were preempted by the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (SLUSA). The Court unanimously ruled that SLUSA barred state law "holder" claims, which are based on losses caused when a shareholder retains stock due to fraud instead of selling it, even though federal securities laws only provided a private cause of action to those suffering losses caused by the purchase or sale of stock. The Court's decision resolved a split among the circuits and closed a significant loophole in the coverage of SLUSA, which it based on the broad language used in the Act and the policies
547 U.S. 71List of class-action lawsuitsMerrill (company)Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., v. DabitMerrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v DabitMerrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith v. DabitMerrill Lynch & Co.Merrill Lynch v. DabitSEC Rule 10b5-1Securities Litigation Uniform Standards ActSonia_SotomayorUnited States corporate law
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Dabit
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Dabit, 547 U.S. 71 (2006), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the extent to which state law securities fraud class action claims were preempted by the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (SLUSA). The Court unanimously ruled that SLUSA barred state law "holder" claims, which are based on losses caused when a shareholder retains stock due to fraud instead of selling it, even though federal securities laws only provided a private cause of action to those suffering losses caused by the purchase or sale of stock. The Court's decision resolved a split among the circuits and closed a significant loophole in the coverage of SLUSA, which it based on the broad language used in the Act and the policies
has abstract
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner ...... ct and the policies behind it.
@en
Wikipage page ID
page length (characters) of wiki page
Wikipage revision ID
994,546,818
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
ArgueDate
ArgueYear
case
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Dabit,
@en
DecideDate
DecideYear
fullname
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Incorporated, Petitioner v. Shadi Dabit
@en
Holding
The Securities Litigation Unif ...... Appeals vacated and remanded.
@en
italic title
force
@en
JoinMajority
Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer
@en
justia
LawsApplied
Litigants
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Dabit
@en
majority
Stevens
@en
NotParticipating
Alito
@en
other source
Supreme Court
@en
oyez
ParallelCitations
Prior
wikiPageUsesTemplate
subject
comment
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner ...... d in the Act and the policies
@en
label
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Dabit
@en
isPrimaryTopicOf
name
@en
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Incorporated, Petitioner v. Shadi Dabit
@en