Basic Inc. v. Levinson
United States Supreme Court
485 U.S. 224 (1988)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Starting in 1976, Combustion Engineering, Inc. (Combustion) had discussions with directors of Basic Inc. (Basic) (defendants) about a possible merger between the corporations. Over the next two years, Basic made three public statements denying that it was engaged in any merger negotiations. Allegedly in reliance on those statements, Levinson and other former Basic investors (plaintiffs) sold their stock in Basic at artificially low prices. The former investors then brought a class-action suit against Basic and its directors, alleging that the false public statements violated SEC Rule 10b-5. The district court certified the class but granted summary judgment to Basic and its directors, finding that statements about preliminary merger negotiations were not material statements of fact. The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed the class certification based on the fraud-on-the-market theory of reliance but reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari on the two issues.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Blackmun, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (White, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 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.