A copy of the Second Circuit's opinion can be found here, courtesy of the WSJ Law Blog.
The briefs in the case are available online, as follows:
- Brief for Defendant-Appellant Underwriters Seeking Reversal of Class Certification Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f)
- Brief for Plaintiffs-Appellees
- Reply Brief for Defendant-Appellant Underwriters Seeking Reversal Of Class Certification Pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f)
- Brief for the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America as Amicus Curiae Supporting Defendant-Appellants and Supporting Reversal of Class Certification Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f)
- Brief For The NAACP Legal Defense And Educational Fund, Inc. as Amicus Curiae In Support Of Plaintiffs-Appellees
As noted previously, here, plaintiffs' counsel maintains a website in the IPO Litigation that has copies of many of the major briefs filed in the case, as well as copies of the amended complaints filed in each of the three hundred consolidated and coordinated cases.
Update: The D&O Diary has a thoughtful post on the decision here, and there are additional news articles here (FT via MSNBC), here (American Lawyer via Law.com). and here (WSJ sub. req'd).
Daily Trivia: According to the firm's resume, Sirota & Sirota filed the first antitrust action in the In re IPO Antitrust Litigation, a distant cousin to the IPO securities litigation, that alleged the collusive "laddering" of IPOs by investment banks in the United States. The litigation was initially dismissed, but reversed by the Second Circuit. A petition for certiorari is pending before the United States Supreme Court. See Billing v. Credit Suisse First Boston Ltd., 287 F.Supp.2d 497, rev’d 426 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed, April 12, 2006 (No. 05-1157).
The firm also is a bit of a rare duck, noting on their resume that they have an active securities litigation practice representing defendants prosecuted by federal or state agencies or sued by investors.