Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System
View Official PDFSummary
A short, plain-English overview of Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System.
In Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, the Supreme Court addressed whether the generic nature of alleged misrepresentations is relevant to the price impact inquiry in securities-fraud class actions. The Court vacated and remanded the case, instructing the Second Circuit to consider all evidence relevant to price impact. The Court also clarified that defendants bear the burden of persuasion to prove a lack of price impact by a preponderance of the evidence.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System.
The Court held that the generic nature of a misrepresentation is important evidence of price impact and that defendants bear the burden of persuasion to prove a lack of price impact.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System that support the summary and concepts above.
The generic nature of a misrepresentation often is important evidence of price impact.
Defendants bear the burden of persuasion to prove a lack of price impact by a preponderance of the evidence.
The Court remands for the Second Circuit to consider all record evidence relevant to price impact.
