Posted on 12/11/2020 7:49:07 PM PST by Stravinsky
(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear Goldman Sachs Group Inc's appeal in a securities fraud case that could redefine the ability of shareholders to pursue class actions against public companies whose stock prices fall.
Goldman is appealing an April decision from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan allowing a class action accusing the bank of hiding conflicts of interest when creating risky subprime securities before the 2008 financial crisis.
A decision is likely before the end of the court's current term in June.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
ah, goldman, the exec position is usually a stepping stone to Sec of Treasury
Well at least they are spending time taking on the real important cases most critical to all people in the nation
Oh yeah, /sarc
They have standing, no doubt, over the Constitution and everything that is sacred in the land.
We finally found _somebody_ with standing!
[ We finally found _somebody_ with standing! ]
Translation: We found out who owns us...
Constitutional Rights and Freedoms = Go sit back down
Yeah, that is so much more important than Seventy Million people being disenfranchised
Yeah. What the others said.
Follow the money...
They supremes including the vaunted ACB flip a finger to the US voter and bow down for Goldman Sachs.... on the same day.
We've been BETRAYED.
SCOTUS is meaningless to me. We now live under communist rule like the USSR and none of these rulings are about me or to protect me. I’m looking out for myself.
My guess is after the Texas case we will see this evolved court side with Goldman
Wow!... SCOTUS sure knows how to add insult to injury huh?
How about a gallows with nine nooses?
Let’s claim the Soviet anthem. It’s vacant right now.
But never mind the collapse of the US.
They sure as hell do.
Don’t cry for Goldman Sachs.
Before investing, investigate who it is that is offering the investment.
The truth is that many of the instruments the investment world was offering in the period leading up to the 2008 crises were not well understood by those who sold them and only well understood by the backroom “financial geniuses” who created them.
On the other hand: Paulson did not become rich merely by creating big investment deals. He also hung on to his gains by hedging his bets, knowing that macro economic changes that run across the globe can alter the prospect of any investment that seems “good” today. That he offered and/or built and/or sold some mortgage based portfolio AND took out a bet on the possibility it might not do well is neither surprising or unethical. If you had his wealth you would do the same. You don’t do it only because you can’t afford to make both kinds of investments. The value of your loss is also going to be considerably less than Paulson’s. which is why he protects his by hedging his bets. A hedge is not a BELIEF that something WILL fail. It is an insurance policy just in case it does.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.