2020 was an unprecedented year in many ways. In mid-March, the United States came to an abrupt halt when the number of coronavirus cases began to surge. A national emergency has been declared, travel bans and collection restrictions have been imposed, schools, workplaces and restaurants have been closed, and the professional and college sports seasons have been canceled. The United States and the world recognized COVID-19 as a potentially unprecedented global catastrophe, a realization that “nearly wrecked financial markets.” On March 16, 2020, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell nearly 13% (3,000 points) – the largest one-day drop in United States history – while the S&P 500 fell 12%, the worst day since 1987 Meanwhile, as “Coronavirus” Wall Street has been plagued by fears. “The VIX, a measure of stock market volatility, rose 43%, breaking the record at the height of the 2008 financial crisis. The CNN index of market sentiment flashed” extreme fear, “while the so-called” fear meter ” Wall Street Journal’s (CBOE Volatility Index) closed above 80 for only the third time in history (the first two events during the 2008 financial crisis). The pandemic brought about many global changes, and one of the most widespread effects has been the accelerated adoption of technology at work and at home. As a result, the technology sector received a significant boost.
With this in mind, we’re proud to present our third annual Securities Litigation Year in Review publication, analyzing national-level securities class lawsuits against listed companies in the technology and communications sectors and summarizing key decisions from courts in major jurisdictions in 2020. These cases will be featured in the Rule submitted by shareholders trying to make up for investment losses after a company’s stock price falls after disclosing negative news. Plaintiffs typically make claims under Sections 10 (b), 20 (a) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “1934 Act”) based on alleged false and misleading statements or omissions by the Company and its officers are based and when the alleged misrepresentation or omission is made in connection with an offer of securities under Sections 11, 12 (a) (2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “1933 Act”).
See the full publication below for more information.