U.S. Securities Class Action Lawsuits Are On the Rise

Federal securities class action lawsuits surged to record levels, with filings doubling historical averages. Factors like cryptocurrency ICOs and M&A disputes drive the trend.

U.S. Securities Class Action Lawsuits Are On the Rise

In 2016 and 2017, the number of federal securities class action lawsuits filed reached record highs, with 2018 on track to match or beat the record. “The number of filings has reached unprecedented levels. In 2017, companies on U.S. exchanges were more likely to be the subject of a class action than in any previous year,” said John Gould, a Cornerstone Research senior vice president, in a statement. “But unlike previous years with substantial filing activity, these recent increases have occurred during a period of thriving financial markets.”

The filings in 2017 alone more than doubled the 20-year historical average, according to Cornerstone Research.432 of the filed lawsuits accused companies of making false or misleading statements, concealing bad news about their businesses, or concealing information about mergers, according to NERA. Cases focusing on weak financial results or regulatory probes increased as well, from 195 in 2016 to 216 in the following year.Complaints involving mergers and acquisitions (M&A doubled in 2017, accounting for 198 filings that year. And 55 complaints against non-U.S. companies were filed in 2017, up from 44 the previous year.

What’s Behind the Rise in Securities Class Action Filings?

It’s common for class action lawsuits to rise during times of economic stress or crisis. The recent rise, however, comes even as the economy is doing well, which indicates that other factors are in play.

One factor could be the prominence of cryptocurrencies. The number of securities class action lawsuits filed against cryptocurrency Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs jumped sharply last year. ICOs offer a way for new blockchain projects to raise money by selling the project’s cryptocurrency tokens in exchange for either fiat currencies or more prominent cryptocurrencies, like Bitcoin. Once the project launches, those who bought the new tokens can use them on the project’s blockchain or trade them for other currencies.

To date, ICOs have not been strictly subject to national or international securities laws, leading countries like China and South Korea to ban them outright. Cases like the 2017 lawsuit filed against Centra ICO allege that ICOs often falsely portray their offerings as “utility-based tokens,” when they operate identically to securities, shares or investments – and therefore should be subject to U.S. securities laws.

Filing vs. Outcomes: What’s Happening to All These Complaints?

While securities class actions are being filed in record numbers, they aren’t being tried that way. The Cornerstone/Stanford Law report also found that these complaints are being dismissed in record numbers as well. In 2017, 205 securities class action lawsuits were dismissed, up from 142 in 2016 – and setting another record.

Experts say changes in Delaware courts’ approach to securities lawsuits played a role in the dismissal of many of the cases. In several cases, judges found that “disclosure-only” settlements, which demanded that companies reveal details about their mergers, often amounted to little material information being revealed. Approximately half of all Fortune 500 companies are incorporated in Delaware.

The number of settlements in 2017 rose to 148, over 133 the previous year. However, these settlements were considerably smaller than in previous years. Overall, settlements averaged less than $25 million each. The single largest settlement in 2017, in a case involving Salix Pharmaceuticals, totaled $210 million, making 2017 the first year since 1998 in which no securities class action settlement reached $250 million, according to NERA.

One type of securities class action filing, however, bucked these trends. The number of Section 11 filings in California state courts dropped by nearly two-thirds in 2017. The decrease may reflect the U.S. Supreme Court’s acceptance of Cyan Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund for oral argument. The case focuses on whether state courts may be used to adjudicate class action lawsuits.

About the author

Dani Alexis Ryskamp, J.D.

Dani Alexis Ryskamp, J.D.

Dani Alexis Ryskamp, J.D., is a multifaceted legal professional with extensive experience in insurance defense, personal injury, and medical malpractice law. Her diverse background includes valuable internships in criminal defense, which have enriched her understanding of various legal sectors. She served as the Executive Note Editor of the Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review, demonstrating a strong commitment to legal scholarship. Dani graduated with a J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School in 2007, following a summa cum laude B.A. in English from Ferris State University in 2004. She is an active member of the Michigan State Bar and the American Bar Association, reflecting her dedication to the legal profession.

Currently, Dani has channeled her legal expertise into a successful career as a freelance writer and book critic, primarily focusing on the legal and literary markets. Her writing portfolio encompasses a wide range of topics, including landmark settlements in medical negligence cases, jury awards in personal injury lawsuits, and analyses of legal trial tactics. Her work not only showcases her legal acumen but also her exceptional ability to communicate complex legal issues effectively to a broader audience. Dani's unique blend of legal practice experience and her prowess in legal writing positions her at the intersection of law and literature, allowing her to contribute meaningfully to both fields.

Dani earned her Bachelor of Arts in English from Ferris State University, where she was involved in various activities, including serving as a tutor at the Writing Center, editor in chief of the Muskegon River Review, president of the Dead Poets' Society, secretary of the Public Administration Association, and a member of the varsity synchronized skating team. She obtained her Doctor of Law from the University of Michigan Law School, participating in the Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review, Wolverine Street Law Moot Court, and the Mock Trial Team. Additionally, Dani holds a Master of Arts in English Language and Literature/Letters from Western Michigan University, where she was a graduate assistant for the Hilltop Review.

background image

Subscribe to our newsletter

Join our newsletter to stay up to date on legal news, insights and product updates from Expert Institute.