Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders
| Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued December 7, 2010 Decided June 13, 2011 | |
| Full case name | Janus Capital Group, Inc., et al. v. First Derivative Traders |
| Docket no. | 09-525 |
| Citations | 564 U.S. 135 (more) 131 S. Ct. 2296; 180 L. Ed. 2d 166 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Dismissed sub nom. In re Mutual Funds Inv. Litigation, 487 F. Supp. 2d 618 (D. Md. 2007); reversed, 566 F.3d 111 (3d Cir. 2009); cert. granted, 561 U.S. 1024 (2010). |
| Holding | |
| A service provider cannot be held liable in a private action under SEC Rule 10b-5. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Thomas, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Alito |
| Dissent | Breyer, joined by Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan |
Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders, 564 U.S. 135 (2011), was a case before the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that a service provider cannot be held liable in a private action under SEC Rule 10b-5.[1]
References
[edit]- ^ Janus Capital Group v. First Derivative Traders United States Supreme Court, Syllabus p. 1, "Held: Because the false statements included in the prospectuses were made by Janus Investment Fund, not by JCM, JCM and JCG cannot be held liable in a private action under Rule 10b–5."
External links
[edit]- Text of Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders, 564 U.S. 135 (2011) is available from: Justia Oyez (oral argument audio) Supreme Court (slip opinion) (archived)
 | This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |