United States Sixth Circuit

ResetAA Font size: Print

Ley v. Visteon Corp., 06-2237

In a class action securities violation case, dismissal of the action is affirmed where: 1) plaintiffs failed to allege a misrepresentation or omission of material fact regarding claims arising from a spin-off; 2) plaintiffs failed to allege a strong inference of scienter regarding claims arising from a Restatement filed with the SEC; 3) plaintiffs failed to allege a strong inference of scienter on the part of defendant-CPA firm, and thus dismissal of a section 10(b) claim was appropriate; and 4) dismissal of plaintiffs' section 20(a) claim was proper as there was no predicate violation of the securities laws.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 08/26/2008
  • Published 08/26/2008

Judges

  • Before: ROGERS and McKEAGUE, Circuit Judges;  ADAMS, District Judge.

Court

  • United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

  • For Appellees:
  • ARGUED:  Kevin D. McHargue, Baron & Budd, Dallas, Texas, for Appellants.  John F. Hartmann, Kirkland & Ellis, LLP, Chicago, Illinois, Peter W. Devereaux, Latham & Watkins, LLP, Los Angeles, California, for Appellees.   ON BRIEF:  Kevin D. McHargue, Randall K. Pulliam, Lisa W. Shirley, Baron & Budd, Dallas, Texas, Marc L. Newman, The Miller Law Firm, Rochester, Michigan, for Appellants.  John F. Hartmann, Michael A. Duffy, Kirkland & Ellis, Chicago, Illinois, Jenice C. Mitchell, John R. Trentacosta, Foley & Lardner, LLP, Detroit, Michigan, Miles N. Ruthberg, Peter W. Devereaux, Latham & Watkins, LLP, Los Angeles, California, Janet M. Link, Michael J. Faris, Latham & Watkins, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellees.

FindLaw Career Center

    Select a Job Title


      Post a Job  |  Careers Home

    View More