Halliburton decision could be more impactful than it appears

Gives corporations considerable grounds to challenge class certification

On Monday June 23, the Supreme Court released its decision in Halliburton v. Erica P. John Fund. While the Court did not toss out the fraud-on-the-market precedent credited to the Basic v. Levinson case of 1988, it has given corporate defendants leverage to fight back when they’re on the receiving end of a shareholder class action lawsuit. To understand the basis of the decision it’s important to look not only at the underlying facts of the case, but also the precedent it challenged. 

Aaron Streett, head of the Supreme Court and constitutional law practice at Baker Botts LLP, presented oral arguments for Halliburton during the case, and breaks out the grounds under which plaintiffs initially brought suit against the company.

Executive Editor

author image

Chris DiMarco

Chris DiMarco, Executive Editor of InsideCounsel magazine, has a background in multimedia production with previous involvement in projects in which he developed and created content...

Bio and more articles

Join the Conversation

Advertisement. Closing in 15 seconds.