← All Authorities
United States Leading Case shareholder rightsparliamentary sovereignty

Cyan Inc v Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund

583 US 416 (2018)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Supreme Court
Year2018
StatusBinding authority

Summary

State courts retain concurrent jurisdiction over 1933 Securities Act class actions; SLUSA does not strip state courts of that jurisdiction.

Key Principle

State courts retain concurrent jurisdiction over class actions arising under the Securities Act of 1933; SLUSA does not strip state courts of jurisdiction over '33 Act claims.

Area of Law

corporate

Related Cases

ASIC v Cassimatis (No 8) (2016) 336 ALR 209

Directors breached their duty of care under s.180 Corporations Act by failing to prevent the company from providing inappropriate financial advice to retail clients.

Tornetta v Musk C.A. No. 2018-0408-KSJM (Del. Ch. 2024)

Board compensation decisions favouring a controlling stockholder require entire fairness review; subsequent stockholder ratification does not restore business judgment deference.

Slack Technologies LLC v Pirani 598 U.S. 759 (2023)

Section 11 of the Securities Act requires plaintiffs to trace their shares to the allegedly misleading registration statement; claims fail where shares cannot be so traced in a direct listing.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Cyan Inc v Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Cyan Inc v Beaver County Emplo...