NASAA’s Brief to the Oregon Supreme Court in Support of the State of Oregon’s Brief on the Merits in Oregon v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., arguing that the Oregon Court of Appeals erred by holding that: (1) antifraud claims under Blue Sky statutes prohibiting misrepresentations and omissions require proof of reliance; and (2) reliance cannot be presumed under the “fraud on the market” doctrine based on the general investment market’s reliance on the misstatements or omissions.

Home > Policy > Legal Briefs > NASAA’s Brief to the Oregon Supreme Court in Support of the State of Oregon’s Brief on the Merits in Oregon v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., arguing that the Oregon Court of Appeals erred by holding that: (1) antifraud claims under Blue Sky statutes prohibiting misrepresentations and omissions require proof of reliance; and (2) reliance cannot be presumed under the “fraud on the market” doctrine based on the general investment market’s reliance on the misstatements or omissions.