<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Virginia Lawyers Weekly &#187; Securities Fraud</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/securities-fraud/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 13:38:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Post-Discovery Complaint Amendment Allowed&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/03/post-discovery-complaint-amendment-allowed/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/03/post-discovery-complaint-amendment-allowed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 16:53:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James C. Cacheris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74140</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In an investor’s suit alleging defendant technology company and its founder committed securities fraud, an Alexandria U.S. District Court overrules defendants’ objections and accepts the magistrate judge’s recommendation to allow plaintiff to file a second amended complaint and motion to compel. In his first amended complaint, plaintiff alleged defendants committed securities fraud by selling plaintiff [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/03/post-discovery-complaint-amendment-allowed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Records System Contract Prompts Fraud Claim&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/12/records-system-contract-prompts-fraud-claim/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/12/records-system-contract-prompts-fraud-claim/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2013 16:48:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge T.S. Ellis III]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=72519</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Richmond U.S. District Court grants a motion to certify a class of investors to sue a public IT company on securities fraud claims alleging company executives made misleading statements of material fact about the company’s ability to fulfill a multi-billion dollar contract to develop a fully integrated records system for the United Kingdom’s National [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/12/records-system-contract-prompts-fraud-claim/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Investor States ‘Loss Causation’ for Fraud Claim&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/05/investor-states-loss-causation-for-fraud-claim/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/05/investor-states-loss-causation-for-fraud-claim/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:37:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James C. Cacheris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=71239</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In an amended complaint alleging defendants, a technology company and its founder, chair and CEO, committed securities fraud by selling plaintiff investor a series of notes as investments to allow defendant company to bring to the U.S. technology the individual defendant’s uncle allegedly developed in Korea to convert plastic waste into oil, the Alexandria U.S. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/05/investor-states-loss-causation-for-fraud-claim/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Securities Fraud Claim for ‘Worthless’ Notes&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/05/no-securities-fraud-claim-for-worthless-notes/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/05/no-securities-fraud-claim-for-worthless-notes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:36:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James C. Cacheris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=71237</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An investor who purchased a series of notes from a defendant he met at his tennis club, investing $32 million in defendant’s purported scheme to bring to the U.S. technology his uncle developed in Korea to convert plastic waste into oil, has his suit for fraud and securities fraud dismissed by an Alexandria U.S. District [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/05/no-securities-fraud-claim-for-worthless-notes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IT Contract, Audit Statements Support Fraud Claims&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/10/15/it-contract-audit-statements-support-fraud-claims/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/10/15/it-contract-audit-statements-support-fraud-claims/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2012 15:58:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Henry E. Hudson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=70131</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Richmond U.S. District Court says a putative class of investors may sue a public IT company on securities fraud claims alleging company executives made misleading statements of material fact about the company’s ability to fulfill a multi-billion dollar contract to develop a fully integrated records system for the United Kingdom’s National Health Service, and [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/10/15/it-contract-audit-statements-support-fraud-claims/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Securities fraud claim arbitrated by FINRA &#8211; $142,437 Arbitration Award&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/06/18/securities-fraud-claim-arbitrated-by-finra-142437-arbitration-award/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/06/18/securities-fraud-claim-arbitrated-by-finra-142437-arbitration-award/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 2012 14:26:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Virginia Lawyers Weekly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Verdicts & Settlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Fraud]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=67793</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This was a FINRA customer sales practice arbitration that proceeded to final evidentiary hearing in Richmond against Community Bankers Securities LLC. The claims tried involved investments in AIC, the parent company of CBS, sold in September 2009 by CBS registered representative John Robert Graves to claimants. The claims asserted included violation of the Virginia Securities [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/06/18/securities-fraud-claim-arbitrated-by-finra-142437-arbitration-award/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Veil-Piercing for Stock Trading Fraud&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/01/10/no-veil-piercing-for-stock-trading-fraud/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/01/10/no-veil-piercing-for-stock-trading-fraud/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 21:34:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Gerald Bruce Lee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/01/10/no-veil-piercing-for-stock-trading-fraud/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the Securities and Exchange Commission’s complaint that defendants’ “Teach Me to Trade” training programs carried out a scheme to dupe inexperienced investors into buying seminar packages and trading stocks, the Alexandria U.S. District Court dismisses the SEC’s claim for piercing the corporate veil to hold two individual defendants liable, but says the SEC can [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/01/10/no-veil-piercing-for-stock-trading-fraud/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Third Time No Charm for Amended Securities Complaint&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/03/16/third-time-no-charm-for-amended-securities-complaint/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/03/16/third-time-no-charm-for-amended-securities-complaint/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 14:37:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Fraud]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=60909</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Plaintiffs, investors who were disappointed after a gaming company’s projected leveraged buyout failed to go through in 2008, cannot salvage their securities fraud lawsuit against the company with claims that the district court should have allowed them to file a Third Amended Complaint that cites a series of “partially corrective disclosures” about what was occurring [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/03/16/third-time-no-charm-for-amended-securities-complaint/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
