In their Corporate and Securities Litigation column, Sarah S. Gold and Richard L. Spinogatti of Proskauer Rose write: The Supreme Court is being asked to overrule 'Basic v. Levinson' because its theoretical economic framework has been repudiated through scholarly and empirical attack, there has been a high level of inconsistency in the courts regarding market efficiency, and the 'Basic' presumption is inconsistent with recent Supreme Court's holdings. If 'Basic' is preserved and the presumption retained, the requisite showing to obtain and maintain its benefit at class certification needs clarification and the relevance of price impact evidence to that inquiry requires consistency.
Class Certification: Back to 'Basic'
New York Law Journal
October 9, 2013