Loss Causation at the Proof Stage 5 Years After Dura


Immediately after the NFL draft, pundits rush to grade each team’s selections, all the while admitting that it will take years to assess which players will live up to their hype and which will not. Lawyers are no different with Supreme Court decisions. In April 2005 when the Supreme Court issued its eagerly-awaited decision in Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo we unleashed a torrent of client alerts offering our best prognostications for how the decision would impact securities litigation.

As its five year anniversary approaches, it is clear that Dura has lived up to the hype. Spurred on by defendants’ arguments that Dura has import beyond its arguably narrow holding, courts have placed a renewed emphasis on loss causation, going well beyond the dismissal stage at which Dura was decided. Loss causation is now a key battleground at every stage of a case from lead plaintiff appointment through post-trial motions. In this publication, Haynes and Boone's Dan Gold assesses how loss causation issues are being treated by courts at the proof stages.

To read the complete article, please click on the PDF link below. 
Reprinted with permission: Securities Reform Act Litigation Reporter, Volume 29, Number 1, April 2010. Copyright © 2010 Computer Law Reporter, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Email Disclaimer