Andrews v. Prudential Securities, Inc.

160 F.3d 304 (1998)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
A
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Andrews v. Prudential Securities, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
160 F.3d 304 (1998)

Facts

The National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) requires broker-dealers to complete a U-5 form once an employee ceases to work for the broker-dealer. This form inquires as to whether or not the member had entered a settlement for $5,000 or more involving the employee’s conduct, while employed with the member. Kyle Andrews (plaintiff) and several of his colleagues were employed with Prudential Securities, Inc. (Prudential) (defendant). After they had left the company, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) brought a complaint against Prudential for misrepresenting several investments. The complaint was settled, with Prudential paying clients affected by the misrepresentation sums in excess of $5,000. Those affected by the misrepresentation complained of their direct dealings with Andrews and his colleagues at the time of said misrepresentation. Therefore, after the settlement, Prudential proceeded to file a U-5 as required by the NASD, naming Andrews and his colleagues in the form. Andrews then brought suit against Prudential alleging defamation, as he claimed that the statements on the form provided to the NASD were not true. The district court granted summary judgment to Prudential. Andrews then appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Kennedy, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 802,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Securities Regulation

Key Terms