Supreme Court blocks state investor class-action suits

[liberal N proud]

WASHINGTON, March 21 — The Supreme Court made it harder Tuesday for investors to join forces to file high-stakes fraud lawsuits against companies.
The 8-0 decision blocks state class-action lawsuits by stockholders who contend they were tricked into holding onto declining shares.
Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the court, said that to rule otherwise would allow ''wasteful, duplicative litigation.''
The decision does not shut the door to lawsuits filed by individual stockholders, but rather to suits brought on behalf of large groups.
''There had been some upswing in these after the Enron and WorldCom scandals,'' said Columbia Law School professor John Coffee, who believes it will be too expensive for individual stock owners to pursue such suits.
It was a major victory for Merrill Lynch & Co., which faced a spate of lawsuits prompted in part by New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's 2002 probe into the investment banking firm's practices.
http://famulus.msnbc.com/famulusgen/ap03-21-074546.asp?t=apnew&vts=32120061256

[Javaman]

1. Why even bother having 8 votes? they all vote the same.

so company A screws employee B. So employee B tries to sue company A. But can't because the supreme idiots said F U.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

2. did you even read the OP?

this is about investor lawsuits by groups rather than by individuals...don't like the ruling? fine...but at least make sense when bitching about it...

sP

[mondo joe]

3. Did you think the point of 8 votes was to try to disagree on everything?

The 8 frequently disagree. Every now and then they are unanimous.

You might conclude on the occassion that they do all agree, there's a good basis for it.