LexisNexis Overview: The 15 U.S.C.S. § 78j(b) implied private right of action did not extend to aiders and abettors, thus, suppliers' and customers' arrangements that allowed the investors' company to mislead its auditor and issue a misleading financial statement were not actionable and were properly dismissed.
Counsel: Stanley M. Grossman argued the cause for petitioner.
Stephen M. Shapiro argued the cause for respondents.
Thomas G. Hungar argued the cause for the United States, as amicus curiae, by special leave of court.
Judge: Kennedy, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Scalia, Thomas, and Alito, JJ., joined. Stevens, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Souter and Ginsburg, JJ., joined, post. Breyer , J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced version of Stoneridge Inv. Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc.
Non-subscribers can view the free, unenhanced version of Stoneridge Inv. Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc. on lexisONE's Free Case Law
See other LexisNexis Communities items featuring Stoneridge Inv. Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc.:
LexisNexis® Corporate & Securities Law Center Podcast featuring Richard Phillips and Mike Eisenberg on Liability and Responsibility in Shareholder Actions post-Stoneridge
Emerging Issues Analysis:
James Fanto: The "Bad Apples" Perspective on Corporate Scandals
Kevin LaCroix, D&O Diary: Will the Financial Reform Bill Include An Aiding and Abetting Liability Provision?
Tom Gorman, SEC Actions: The Second Circuit, Primary Liability and the Bright Line Test
John Rak, LexisNexis Corporate & Securities Legal Editor: On Stoneridge Investment Partners and Colonel Henry Blake
Corporate Fraud -- Is It Really Just a Few Bad Apples?
Lexis.com subscribers may access the following materials:
Supreme Court Briefs