Talk:Private Securities Litigation Reform Act

What's the deal?

So it makes it harder to sue companies for damages over bad stock performance or something like that?--Jerryseinfeld 12:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The law was designed to discourage "strike suits," or class action suits brought by plaintiffs with little financial risk in the company any time the stock price fell. Before this law, there were certain certain "professional plaintiffs" that held a small number of shares in lots of companies. As soon as one of the stocks tanked, the plaitiff would file a suit--usually in partnership with one of a small handful of lawyers that "specialized" in this sort of thing--against the company. These frivolous nuisance suits cost a lot of money to defend against or settle. The law didn't stop strike suits altogether, but it made many harder to bring. If a company commits genuine fraud, it's still possible to bring a class action against them.--Bond Head 19:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dodd's Condo Deal

68.14.84.194, Dodd's condo deal had nothing to do with the PSLRA. The Dems weren't in control of the Senate at the time, and the Chair of the Banking Committee was Al D'Amato, not Dodd. Dodd wasn't even the ranking member on the committee, Paul Sarbanes was. The bill was overwhelmingly supported by both Ds and Rs. And Dodd's condo deal had nothing to do with securities fraud. To suggest that the condo deal has anything to do with the PSLRA is ludicrous. Oh, and your reference is broken, too. Bond Head (talk) 02:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

forward looking

this needs to be added:

PSLRA's Safe Harbors for forward-looking statements, set forth in 15 U.S.C. § 78u-5(c), which protects a forward-looking statement such as a financial projection, if the statement is (1) identified as a forward-looking statement and accompanied by meaningful cautionary language, or (2) is immaterial, or (3) is made without actual knowledge that it is false.

http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=79412 http://www.ffhsj.com/index.cfm?pageID=25&itemID=5796 http://www.law.uc.edu/CCL/34Act/sec21E.html --71.111.192.79 (talk) 20:46, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]