Observations of the legal scene from the Cornhusker State, home of Roscoe Pound and Justice Clarence Thomas' in-laws, and beyond.
Tuesday, April 26, 2005
SCOTUS slaps down 9th Circks again
The US Supremes (SCOTUS) has slapped down the 9th circuit again, according to surveys the most reversed circuit court of appeals in the country.
This time the ignominy comes from the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court in DURA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. V. BROUDO (03-932) on writ of cert to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, 339 F.3d 933, reversed and remanded. Justice Breyer holds that while plaintiffs were not required to any specific pleading an a securities fraud action appearing to complain about inflpurchasing secuirities at inflated prices the still needed to allege something that would lead to proof of proximate causation and economic loss. The plaintiffs’ complaint failed to allege these requirements. While the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure . 8(a)(2) require only “a short and plain statement of the claim,” the “short and plain statement” must provide the defendant with “fair notice of what the plaintiff’s claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957). The complaint (and we asusme the Court's reasoning) failed this simple test. Allowing any pleading in a securities fraud lawsuit that does not touch upon any facts indicating a valid cause of action would lead to innumerable shake down lawsuits. "It would permit a plaintiff with a largely groundless claim to simply take up the time of a number of other people, with the right to do so representing an in terrorem increment of the settlement value, rather than a reasonably founded hope that the [discovery] process will reveal relevant evidence.” Blue Chip Stamps, 421 U.S., at 741.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment