Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo

Docket No.: 03-932
Certiorari Granted: Jun 28 2004
Argued: January 12, 2005
Decided: April 19, 2005

Topics:

Securities Act of 1933, the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, or the Williams Act, Economic Activity, Federal Regulation of Securities, Civil Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, abuse of discretion, habeas, habeas corpus, murder, preliminary injunction, probable cause, stock offerings

PartyNames: Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. v. Michael Broudo, et al.
Petitioner: Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al.
Respondent: Michael Broudo, et al.

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Citation: 339 F3d 933
Supreme Court Docket

Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al.
v.
Michael Broudo, et al.
544 U.S. 336 (2005)
Question Presented:

Whether a securities fraud plaintiff invoking the fraud-on-the-market theory must demonstrate loss causation by pleading and proving a causal connection between the alleged fraud and the investment's subsequent decline in price.

Question:

To prove "loss causation" in a securities fraud case, is it sufficient to show that the price of the security on the date of purchase was inflated because of misrepresentation?

Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo
ORAL ARGUMENT

January 12, 2005

Holding: reversed and remanded
Decision: Decision: 9 votes for Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 0 vote(s) against
Vote: 9-0

Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo
Case Documents

1Opinion in Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo
2Opinion in Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo
3Slip Opinion in Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo
Additional documents for this case are pending review.