BLOG!
Brownstone Law

Lorenzo v. Securities and Exchange Commission: Federal Appeal

Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b–5 makes it unlawful to

(a) “employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud,” (b) “make any untrue statement of a material fact,” or (c) “engage in any act, prac- tice, or course of business” that “operates . . . as a fraud or deceit” in connection with the purchase or sale of securities. Read more about white collar crime under 10(b)(5). In Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders, 564 U. S. 135, this Court held that to be a “maker” of a statement under subsection (b) of that Rule, one must have “ultimate authority over the statement, including its content and whether and how to communicate it.” Id., at 142. On the facts of Janus, this meant that an investment adviser who had merely “participat[ed] in the drafting of a false statement” “made” by another could not be held liable in a private ac- tion under subsection (b). Id., at 145. Read more about this Federal Appeal:

Petitioner Francis Lorenzo, while the director of investment banking at an SEC-registered brokerage firm, sent two e-mails to prospective investors. The content of those e-mails, which Lorenzo’s boss supplied, described a potential investment in a company with “con- firmed assets” of $10 million. In fact, Lorenzo knew that the company had recently disclosed that its total assets were worth less than $400,000. 

Authors
Federal Appeal Lawyers In Antitrust
Author Name
Robert L Sirianni
(888) 233-8895
Related Posts
BLOG!

Lorenzo v. Securities and Exchange Commission: Federal Appeal

Table of Contents

Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b–5 makes it unlawful to

(a) “employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud,” (b) “make any untrue statement of a material fact,” or (c) “engage in any act, prac- tice, or course of business” that “operates . . . as a fraud or deceit” in connection with the purchase or sale of securities. Read more about white collar crime under 10(b)(5). In Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders, 564 U. S. 135, this Court held that to be a “maker” of a statement under subsection (b) of that Rule, one must have “ultimate authority over the statement, including its content and whether and how to communicate it.” Id., at 142. On the facts of Janus, this meant that an investment adviser who had merely “participat[ed] in the drafting of a false statement” “made” by another could not be held liable in a private ac- tion under subsection (b). Id., at 145. Read more about this Federal Appeal:

Petitioner Francis Lorenzo, while the director of investment banking at an SEC-registered brokerage firm, sent two e-mails to prospective investors. The content of those e-mails, which Lorenzo’s boss supplied, described a potential investment in a company with “con- firmed assets” of $10 million. In fact, Lorenzo knew that the company had recently disclosed that its total assets were worth less than $400,000. 

Recent Posts

Grounds for Filing a Federal Appeal in New York: A Comprehensive Guide 

Rob Sirianni May 26, 2025
0

In the complex landscape of the United States judicial system, understanding the grounds for filing

Uncategorized

What is a Federal Appeal and How Does it Work? 

Rob Sirianni May 26, 2025
0

In the intricate world of U.S. federal courts, the federal appeal process serves as a

Uncategorized

Why Hiring a Dedicated Appellate Law Firm Can Make or Break Your Case  

Rob Sirianni May 1, 2025
0

The complex and specialized field of appellate law requires expertise, precision, and methodical knowledge of

civil-appeal
DMCA Protection Status