30.03.2015 Views

Lead Plaintiff's Opposition to CSFB MSJ 11/13/06 - The ENRON Fraud

Lead Plaintiff's Opposition to CSFB MSJ 11/13/06 - The ENRON Fraud

Lead Plaintiff's Opposition to CSFB MSJ 11/13/06 - The ENRON Fraud

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>The</strong>se pronouncements must be read in conjunction with the Supreme Court’s<br />

longstanding and consistent recognition that liability under Rule 10b-5 is not limited <strong>to</strong> the<br />

making of a false statement or omission. Because Rule 10b-5(a) and (c) render it actionable <strong>to</strong><br />

“‘employ any device, scheme, or artifice <strong>to</strong> defraud’” and/or <strong>to</strong> “‘engage in any act, practice, or<br />

course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person,’”<br />

liability may be found under these subsections notwithstanding the absence of an actionable<br />

misstatement or omission. 23<br />

Enron, 20<strong>06</strong> U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43146, at *157. Claims for<br />

nonrepresentational conduct 24 under subsections (a) and (c) of the Rule are commonly referred <strong>to</strong><br />

as those for “scheme liability.” See Enron, 20<strong>06</strong> U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43146, at *155-*174.<br />

In determining precisely what conduct warrants the imposition of scheme liability, it<br />

should be noted that “the Supreme Court has emphasized repeatedly that Section 10(b) ‘should<br />

23<br />

See, e.g., Affiliated Ute Citizens v. United States, 4<strong>06</strong> U.S. 128, 152-53 (1972) (“To be<br />

sure, the second subparagraph of the rule specifies the making of an untrue statement of a<br />

material fact and the omission <strong>to</strong> state a material fact. <strong>The</strong> first and third subparagraphs are not<br />

so restricted.”). This Court has rightly and repeatedly acknowledge that liability exists under<br />

Rule 10b-5(a) and (c) for conduct not amounting <strong>to</strong> misstatements or omissions. See, e.g., In re<br />

Enron Corp. Sec. Litig., 236 F.R.D. 3<strong>13</strong> (S.D. Tex. 20<strong>06</strong>) (“deceptive acts under Section 10(b)<br />

include conduct beyond the making of false statements or misleading omissions, for facts<br />

effectively can be misrepresented by action as well as words”) (quoting SEC Brief (Ex. 3) at 8).<br />

24<br />

As the SEC has noted and courts have routinely held, both Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5<br />

cover (among other things) deceptive conduct, acts, and practices beyond mere false statements<br />

or market manipulation:<br />

It has long been accepted that Section 10(b), and Rule 10b-5(a) and (c)<br />

thereunder, cover conduct beyond the making of false statements and misleading<br />

omissions, which are covered by Rule 10b-5(b). <strong>The</strong> Supreme Court has stated<br />

that Section 10(b) encompasses deceptive “practices,” Santa Fe Indus., Inc. v.<br />

Green, 430 U.S. 462, 475-76 (1977), deceptive “conduct,” id. at 475 n.15;<br />

O’Hagan, 521 U.S. 659, and deceptive “acts,” Central Bank, 5<strong>11</strong> U.S. at 173; see<br />

Bankers Life, 404 U.S. at 9.<br />

SEC Brief (Ex. 3) at <strong>13</strong>-14.<br />

- 20 -

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!