Understanding the Fraud-on-the-Market Principle in Securities Law

Q: How does this principle affect my investment?

If you purchased securities based on false information, this principle may help you claim damages without proving direct reliance.

Q: Can I file a claim under this principle?

Yes, if you believe you were misled by a company&#039;s statements, you may have grounds for a claim.

Definition & Meaning

The fraud-on-the-market principle is a legal rule in securities law that allows plaintiffs to assume they relied on misleading information when purchasing a security. This assumption applies when the security is traded in a public market that is considered efficient and transparent. The principle is based on the idea that the market price reflects all available public information about a company, including any fraudulent statements. This rule was established in the case of Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 (9th Cir. Cal. 1975).

Table of content

Legal Use & context

The fraud-on-the-market principle is primarily used in civil securities fraud cases. It is relevant in situations where investors claim they suffered losses due to false or misleading statements made by a company about its stock. This principle simplifies the process for plaintiffs by allowing them to prove reliance on the information without needing to show that they were directly aware of the fraudulent statements. Users can manage related legal processes using US Legal Forms templates designed for securities law claims.

Key legal elements

Real-world examples

Here are a couple of examples of abatement:

Example 1: An investor buys shares of a company after it announces a new product, which later turns out to be a failure due to undisclosed issues. The investor can claim reliance on the market price, which reflected the misleading optimism about the product.

Example 2: A company falsely claims its earnings are significantly higher than they are. Investors who purchase stock based on this information can use the fraud-on-the-market principle to argue that they relied on the inflated stock price. (hypothetical example)

State-by-state differences

Examples of state differences (not exhaustive):

State	Notes
California	Strong protections for investors and a robust legal framework for securities fraud claims.
New York	Home to many large securities firms; case law heavily influences how fraud-on-the-market is applied.
Texas	Has specific statutes governing securities fraud that may affect the application of this principle.

This is not a complete list. State laws vary, and users should consult local rules for specific guidance.

Comparison with related terms

Term	Definition
Material Misstatement	A false statement that would influence an investor's decision.
Reliance	The act of investors depending on the accuracy of information provided by a company.
Insider Trading	The illegal buying or selling of securities based on non-public information.

Common misunderstandings

What to do if this term applies to you

If you believe you have been a victim of securities fraud, consider the following steps:

Gather all relevant information and documentation related to your investment.
Consult with a legal professional who specializes in securities law to evaluate your case.
You can explore US Legal Forms for templates that may assist you in filing a claim.

Find the legal form that fits your case

Browse our library of 85,000+ state-specific legal templates.

This field is required

Quick facts

Typical fees: Varies by attorney; some work on a contingency basis.
Jurisdiction: Federal and state courts.
Possible penalties: Financial restitution, fines, and legal fees.

Key takeaways

Frequently asked questions

What is the fraud-on-the-market principle?

It is a legal rule that allows investors to assume they relied on misleading information when purchasing securities traded in an efficient market.