Mismatch: The Misuse of Market Efficiency in Market Manipulation Class Actions

Korsmo, Charles R.

Journal: William & Mary Law Review

Volume: 52

First Page: 1111

Year: 2011

Bluebook Citation: 52 WM. & MARY L. REV. 1111 (2011)

Author: Charles R. Korsmo: all 10 publications


Citation analytics

How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

Cited
1
Citing decision
1
Courts citing
Most recently cited by1

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Abstract

Plaintiffs commonly bring two distinct types of claims under section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: (1) claims of material misrepresentations or omissions, and (2) claims of tradebased market manipulation. Despite the distinctive features of the two types of claims, courts have tended to treat them identically when applying the “fraud on the market” doctrine. In particular, courts have required both types of plaintiffs to make identical showings that the relevant security was traded in an “efficient market” in order to gain a presumption of reliance. The reasons for requiring such a showing by plaintiffs in a misrepresentation case are, however, inapplicable in market manipulation cases.

Plaintiffs alleging market manipulation should not be required to demonstrate an efficient market in order to benefit from the fraud on the market doctrine’s presumption of reliance. If plaintiffs are made to make any showing at all, it should be a showing of loss causation.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.