An Implied Private Right of Action under Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Judicial implication of private rights of action from federal securities legislation has been hailed as a major step toward meaningful regulation of securities practices and market stability. This Note examines a recent extension of implied liability under a provision not previously considered supportive of such a right. After attempting to develop a workable rationale for the private right, the author concludes that the extension cannot be supported and that the court should have taken heed of the cautiousness exhibited by other courts and refused to extend implied liability to situations not clearly within the intended protective scheme of the legislation

Theory and Phenomenology of Heavy Flavor at RHIC

We review the problem of heavy-quark diffusion in the Quark-Gluon Plasma and its ramifications for heavy-quark spectra in heavy-ion collisions at RHIC. In particular, we attempt to reconcile underlying mechanisms of several seemingly different approaches that have been put forward to explain the large suppression and elliptic flow of non-photonic electron spectra. We also emphasize the importance of a quantitative description of the bulk medium evolution to extract reliable values for the heavy-quark diffusion coefficient.Comment: 8 pages latex, including 10 eps figures; plenary talk at SQM08, Beijing (China), Oct. 06-10, 200

Expanded Liability under Section 12 of the Securities Act: When Is a Seller not a Seller?

The language of section 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 limits the scope of potential defendants thereunder to those people who offer or sell a security. The courts have consistently expanded the class of eligible section 12 defendants to include people who do not fit the traditional notion of a seller. The author traces that judicial expansion and suggests that the most recent cases may be developing a more realistic, though still imperfect, approach to section 12 liability

An Implied Private Right of Action under Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Judicial implication of private rights of action from federal securities legislation has been hailed as a major step toward meaningful regulation of securities practices and market stability. This Note examines a recent extension of implied liability under a provision not previously considered supportive of such a right. After attempting to develop a workable rationale for the private right, the author concludes that the extension cannot be supported and that the court should have taken heed of the cautiousness exhibited by other courts and refused to extend implied liability to situations not clearly within the intended protective scheme of the legislation