United States: Second Circuit Accepts Controversial "Inflation-Maintenance" Theory Of Securities Fraud Liability

In so-called "price maintenance" securities fraud cases, plaintiffs argue that a misrepresentation that does not cause a stock's price to rise can nevertheless be actionable under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange of 1934 ("Exchange Act") on the theory that the misrepresentation prevented a stock's artificially-inflated price from falling. The Seventh and Eleventh Circuits have accepted price maintenance as a cognizable theory of liability under the Exchange Act.1 However, in IBEW Local 98 Pension Fund v. Best Buy Co., the Eighth Circuit, at least in the view of Judge Murphy in dissent, effectively rejected price maintenance as a cognizable theory under the Exchange Act when it held that a defendant had rebutted the fraud-on-the-market presumption of reliance by showing a lack of price impact pursuant to the US Supreme Court's decision in Halliburton II.2 On the same day that Best Buy was decided, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in In re Pfizer Inc. Securities Litigation, discussed the theory, but noted that the Second Circuit had not and was not in Pfizer endorsing the theory.3

In In re Vivendi, S.A. Securities Litigation, No. 15-180 (2d Cir. Sept. 27, 2016), the Second Circuit agreed with the Seventh and Eleventh Circuits and endorsed price maintenance as a cognizable theory of securities fraud liability. The Vivendi Court accordingly rejected the argument that an alleged misstatement must be associated with an increase in artificial inflation to have an actionable "price impact." Rather, the Court held, an alleged misstatement can affect the market price of a stock by maintaining already-existing inflation. Thus, a securities fraud defendant cannot avoid liability for an alleged misstatement merely because the misstatement is not associated with an increase in the stock's price, regardless whether the preexisting inflation was the result of the defendant's fraud. However, because Vivendi did not address the propriety of class certification and did not discuss Best Buy, it remains to be seen whether the Second Circuit will view the Vivendi decision as effectively foreclosing an argument that lack of price impact can defeat class certification in the face of evidence that the prior inflation was "maintained" by the alleged misrepresentation or omission.

Background

Vivendi was an appeal from a jury verdict finding Vivendi Universal, S.A. ("Vivendi") liable for securities fraud under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5. The class plaintiffs were investors in Vivendi's stock between October 30, 2000 and August 14, 2002. They alleged that during this period, the defendants (Vivendi, its CEO and its CFO) made 57 material misstatements on the subject of Vivendi's "liquidity risk" — i.e., its ability to timely meet its financial obligations and fund its operations — in connection with and resulting from the company's various acquisitions and related efforts to transition from a utilities conglomerate into a global media powerhouse. The jury found that neither the CEO nor the CFO was liable for the alleged misstatements, but found Vivendi liable under Section 10(b) for all 57 alleged misstatements. The district court awarded Vivendi judgment as a matter of law with respect to one statement (a determination not appealed by plaintiffs), but otherwise denied Vivendi's motion for judgment as a matter of law and for a new trial.4

The Vivendi Decision

On appeal, Vivendi argued, among other things, that the district court abused its discretion in admitting the testimony of plaintiffs' expert, Dr. Blaine Nye, on damages and loss causation. Nye had performed a standard event study to determine whether, and the extent to which, Vivendi's stock price was artificially inflated during the class period due to the market's misapprehension of the company's true liquidity risk.5 However, Nye's analysis did not purport to prove that that misapprehension was caused by Vivendi's alleged fraud and did not assume that the inflation was due to misrepresentations. As the Court explained, "[a]rtificial inflation is not necessarily fraud-induced, for a falsehood can exist in the market (and thereby cause artificial inflation) for reasons unrelated to fraudulent conduct."6

Because Nye did not determine the amount of artificial inflation in reference to whether that inflation was due to Vivendi's alleged misstatements, his testimony did not exhibit any obvious correlation between the inflation increases he identified and the timing of the challenged statements. Indeed, 42 of the challenged statements were not associated with an immediate increase in the price inflation calculated by Nye's model. Vivendi argued that this lack of correlation rendered Nye's testimony unreliable because, as to those 42 statements, there was no "price impact," meaning that those statements could not be actionable under the securities laws. Rather, Vivendi argued, Nye's testimony necessarily rested on an impermissible "inflation maintenance" theory — i.e., that statements that merely maintain already extant inflation nonetheless affect a company's stock price.7

The Second Circuit rejected Vivendi's argument that a statement must be associated with an increase in inflation to be actionable. The Vivendi Court explained that "price impact," as relevant to the transaction causation or reliance inquiry, simply concerns whether the alleged misrepresentation "'affected the market price.'"8 Moreover, the Court reasoned, Vivendi's contention that statements that merely maintain inflation have no such effect rested on two "problematic" premises: that the inflation would have remained if Vivendi had simply remained silent; and that Vivendi had the option of remaining silent even though it in fact chose to speak.9

As to the first point, the Court noted that preexisting inflation could remain unchanged in the face of silence, but it might not. However, where, as here, the defendant does not remain silent, it cannot be known whether the inflation would have remained unchanged in the face of silence. And because the Court viewed Vivendi's premise that inflation would have continued in the face of silence as dubious (believing that the truth likely would have eventually come out on its own if no longer hidden by a misstatement's perpetuation of the market's misconception), it determined that it was "far more coherent" to conclude that a material misstatement in the context of preexisting inflation "does not simply maintain the inflation, but indeed 'prevents [the] preexisting inflation in a stock price from dissipating.'"10

Second, the Court questioned whether it was even relevant what would have happened had Vivendi chosen not to speak. It is "well-established," the Court explained, that once a company speaks on an issue or topic, it has a duty to tell the whole truth, even if there is no existing independent duty to disclose information on the issue or topic.11 Thus, "once a company chooses to speak, the proper question for purposes of our inquiry into price impact is not what might have happened had a company remained silent, but what would have happened if it had spoken truthfully."12

Having dispelled with what it determined were the "erroneous principles" upon which Vivendi's argument rested, the Court concluded that "it is hardly illogical or inconsistent with precedent to find that a statement may cause inflation not simply by adding it to a stock, but by maintaining it."13 Were that not so, the Court continued, "companies could eschew securities-fraud liability whenever they actively perpetuate (i.e., [through] affirmative misstatements) inflation that is already extant in their stock price, as long as they cannot be found liable for whatever originally introduced the inflation."14 "'We decline to erect a per se rule that, once a market is already misinformed about a particular truth, corporations are free to knowingly and intentionally reinforce material misconceptions by repeating falsehoods with impunity."15 Thus, the Court rejected Vivendi's argument that "the 'price impact' requirement inherent in the reliance element of a private § 10(b) action means that an alleged misstatement must be associated with an increase in inflation to have any effect on a company's stock price."16

The Significance of Vivendi

The Second Circuit currently has before it challenges to class certification orders in securities class actions presenting "price maintenance" theories. In those cases, arguments that, under Halliburton II, the fraud-on-the- market presumption of reliance had been rebutted by showing that the alleged misrepresentations had not had any "price impact" were unsuccessful in the district court. However, the Eighth Circuit's Best Buy decision, reversing a class certification order on the basis that the presumption of reliance had been rebutted under Halliburton II, presented Circuit Court authority in support of such a position. The Vivendi appeal did not concern a class certification order, and the opinion did not discuss the Eighth Circuit's Best Buy decision. Thus, although Vivendi's analysis is potentially adverse to such an argument, it remains to be seen whether the Second Circuit will apply Vivendi to the class certification context and treat the decision as having effectively rejected the analysis and holding of Best Buy.

Footnotes

 1 See Glickenhaus & Co. v. Household Int'l, Inc., 787 F.3d 408, 419 (7th Cir. 2015); FindWhat Inv'r Grp. v. FindWhat.com, 658 F.3d 1282, 1314 (11th Cir. 2011).

 2 See 818 F.3d 775, 784 (8th Cir. 2016) (Murphy, J., dissenting); Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2398, 2410 (2014) ("Halliburton II") (holding that defendants have the right to rebut the fraud-on-the-market presumption of reliance by providing evidence showing the alleged misrepresentations did not actually affect the stock price); see also Eighth Circuit Holds Presumption Of Reliance Rebutted Under Halliburton II And Reverses Class Certification In Securities Action

 3 See 819 F.3d 642 (2d Cir. 2016); see also Second Circuit Stresses Control, Not Attribution, In Applying Janus's "Ultimate Authority" Test, And Also Allows Expert Testimony In Support Of An "Inflation-Maintenance" Theory Of Liability

4 See In re Vivendi Universal, S.A. Secs. Litig., 765 F. Supp. 2d 512, 545 (S.D.N.Y. 2011).

 5 Vivendi, slip op. at 59-62.

 6 Id. at 66.

 7 Id. at 67-68.

 8 Vivendi, slip op. at 69 (quoting Erica P. John Fund, Inc. v. Halliburton Co., 563 U.S. 805, 814 (2011) ("Halliburton I")).

9 Vivendi, slip op. at 70.

10 Vivendi, slip op. at 71 (quoting FindWhat, 658 F.3d at 1317).

11 Vivendi, slip op. at 72.

12 Id. at 73

13 Id.

14 Id.

15 Vivendi, slip op. at 75 (quoting FindWhat, 658 F.3d at 1317).

16 Vivendi, slip op. at 78. The Court also questioned how, even if it were valid, Vivendi's price impact argument would suggest that the district court abused its discretion in admitting Nye's testimony. The Court explained that Nye's model measured "actual inflation" due to investors not knowing the truth about Vivendi's liquidity risk (as opposed to "fraud-induced inflation," i.e., the difference between the stock price and what the price would have been if the defendants had spoken truthfully). His testimony was thus relevant to loss causation because the total amount of actual inflation he identified was the maximum amount of loss potentially caused by Vivendi's alleged misstatements, and was also relevant to damages because his model provided a means for calculating each plaintiff's damages. At most, Vivendi's price impact argument, if successful, would imply that plaintiffs could not establish reliance with respect to some of the relevant misstatements, but that would not render Nye's testimony wholly irrelevant to loss causation or damages or render his calculation of artificial inflation unreliable. See id. at 76-78.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions