False forward-looking statements and the PSLRA's safe harbor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Voluntary public disclosure of soft information - corporate projections and predictions and other forward-looking statements - is now the norm, following a brief learning curve after the enactment of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act's safe harbor for forward-looking information in 1995. As a consequence, allegations of false forward-looking statements are also quite standard in today's class action securities fraud pleading. This work addresses an emerging trend, spearheaded by the Seventh Circuit's decision in Asher v. Baxter International, to introduce a subjective scienter or intent-like inquiry into consideration of the application of the PSLRA's safe harbor. Numerous district courts have followed Asher's lead, employing a variety of semantic maneuvers to circumvent the safe harbor's straightforward, occasionally distasteful application. Bolstered by a 2009 opinion from the Fifth Circuit, this important minority view has created a circuit court split. This Article provides a definitive analysis of the Asher-inspired jurisprudential detour, concluding that it is supported neither by the statute and its legislative history, nor any sound policy argument. With this premise established, the Article then prescribes intellectually grounded ameliorative measures that can be taken by courts, which face increasingly imaginative and often appealing arguments for avoiding the prophylactic nature of the statutory safe harbor.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)595-643
Number of pages49
JournalIndiana Law Journal
Volume86
Issue number2
StatePublished - Mar 2011

Fingerprint

harbor
district court
fraud
statute
projection
act
semantics
minority
reform
trend
history
learning

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law

Cite this

False forward-looking statements and the PSLRA's safe harbor. / Olazabal, Ann.

In: Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 86, No. 2, 03.2011, p. 595-643.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4be8f3ca504446598761846decd1d8fe,
title = "False forward-looking statements and the PSLRA's safe harbor",
abstract = "Voluntary public disclosure of soft information - corporate projections and predictions and other forward-looking statements - is now the norm, following a brief learning curve after the enactment of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act's safe harbor for forward-looking information in 1995. As a consequence, allegations of false forward-looking statements are also quite standard in today's class action securities fraud pleading. This work addresses an emerging trend, spearheaded by the Seventh Circuit's decision in Asher v. Baxter International, to introduce a subjective scienter or intent-like inquiry into consideration of the application of the PSLRA's safe harbor. Numerous district courts have followed Asher's lead, employing a variety of semantic maneuvers to circumvent the safe harbor's straightforward, occasionally distasteful application. Bolstered by a 2009 opinion from the Fifth Circuit, this important minority view has created a circuit court split. This Article provides a definitive analysis of the Asher-inspired jurisprudential detour, concluding that it is supported neither by the statute and its legislative history, nor any sound policy argument. With this premise established, the Article then prescribes intellectually grounded ameliorative measures that can be taken by courts, which face increasingly imaginative and often appealing arguments for avoiding the prophylactic nature of the statutory safe harbor.",
author = "Ann Olazabal",
year = "2011",
month = "3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "86",
pages = "595--643",
journal = "Indiana Law Journal",
issn = "0019-6665",
publisher = "Indiana University",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - False forward-looking statements and the PSLRA's safe harbor

AU - Olazabal, Ann

PY - 2011/3

Y1 - 2011/3

N2 - Voluntary public disclosure of soft information - corporate projections and predictions and other forward-looking statements - is now the norm, following a brief learning curve after the enactment of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act's safe harbor for forward-looking information in 1995. As a consequence, allegations of false forward-looking statements are also quite standard in today's class action securities fraud pleading. This work addresses an emerging trend, spearheaded by the Seventh Circuit's decision in Asher v. Baxter International, to introduce a subjective scienter or intent-like inquiry into consideration of the application of the PSLRA's safe harbor. Numerous district courts have followed Asher's lead, employing a variety of semantic maneuvers to circumvent the safe harbor's straightforward, occasionally distasteful application. Bolstered by a 2009 opinion from the Fifth Circuit, this important minority view has created a circuit court split. This Article provides a definitive analysis of the Asher-inspired jurisprudential detour, concluding that it is supported neither by the statute and its legislative history, nor any sound policy argument. With this premise established, the Article then prescribes intellectually grounded ameliorative measures that can be taken by courts, which face increasingly imaginative and often appealing arguments for avoiding the prophylactic nature of the statutory safe harbor.

AB - Voluntary public disclosure of soft information - corporate projections and predictions and other forward-looking statements - is now the norm, following a brief learning curve after the enactment of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act's safe harbor for forward-looking information in 1995. As a consequence, allegations of false forward-looking statements are also quite standard in today's class action securities fraud pleading. This work addresses an emerging trend, spearheaded by the Seventh Circuit's decision in Asher v. Baxter International, to introduce a subjective scienter or intent-like inquiry into consideration of the application of the PSLRA's safe harbor. Numerous district courts have followed Asher's lead, employing a variety of semantic maneuvers to circumvent the safe harbor's straightforward, occasionally distasteful application. Bolstered by a 2009 opinion from the Fifth Circuit, this important minority view has created a circuit court split. This Article provides a definitive analysis of the Asher-inspired jurisprudential detour, concluding that it is supported neither by the statute and its legislative history, nor any sound policy argument. With this premise established, the Article then prescribes intellectually grounded ameliorative measures that can be taken by courts, which face increasingly imaginative and often appealing arguments for avoiding the prophylactic nature of the statutory safe harbor.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952609713&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79952609713&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:79952609713

VL - 86

SP - 595

EP - 643

JO - Indiana Law Journal

JF - Indiana Law Journal

SN - 0019-6665

IS - 2

ER -