Arkansas Teachers Retirement System v. Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

Case Updates

Click here to view the opinion.

After the Second Circuit granted the Rule 23(f) petition, the U.S. Chamber filed a second amicus brief on the merits. The amicus brief argues that the district court’s decision is contrary to Halliburton II, in which the Supreme Court held that to sustain a securities class action lawsuit, the plaintiff must show an alleged misrepresentation or omission had an impact on stock price. The brief further argues that the lower court failed to properly apply Federal Rule of Evidence 301 in allocating the burden of proof with respect to whether the alleged misrepresentations had price impact. The brief concludes by explaining that the lower court’s decision threatens to increase abusive securities class action litigation and harm U.S. business.

Lewis J. Liman of Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLPserved as co-counsel for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on behalf of the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center.

The U.S. Chamber urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to grant a Rule 23(f) petition for appellate review of a district court’s decision certifying a class of all purchases of Goldman Sachs stock between 2007 and 2010 concerning alleged misrepresentations made in relation to the Abacus collateralized debt instrument. The Chamber’s brief urged appellate review of the lower court’s error in applying the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Halliburton II regarding reliance in securities class action litigation.

Mitchell A. Lowenthal and Lewis J. Liman of Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLPserved as co-counsel for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on behalf of the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center.