The Implications of Matrixx
New York, New York
13 April 2011
Hosted By: NERA Economic Consulting
NERA hosted a seminar in New York City on 13 April 2011 that focused on the 22 March Supreme Court decision in Matrixx. The Court ruled that plaintiffs in a shareholder class action could allege that Matrixx withheld material information by failing to disclose adverse event reports, even though Matrixx argued that the number of adverse event reports it received was not statistically significant and therefore not material. The Matrixx case raises questions not just about how it affects pleading materiality, but also whether it touches upon the pleading and proving of elements such as loss causation, and upon the use of statistical significance generally in securities fraud and other litigation.
Our panelists discussed the significance of this decision, including what lawyers need to know about statistical significance in non-technical terms and relating that to materiality and loss causation, including relevant case law. The panel featured Salvatore J. Graziano, Partner at Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann; Steven J. Kolleeny, Special Counsel at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; and Dr. David Tabak, Senior Vice President at NERA. Lucy P. Allen, Senior Vice President at NERA, moderated the discussion.
To contact us about this event, please click here.
