Labels:book | reckoner | sky OCR: To the contrary, there substantial reason why the scienter element would not have becn Ieft vaguely t depend on whether the defendant might ultimately prevail on an argument for disclosure Xinp This Court has alrcady rej jected the idea of overlaying duty: 'no duty "dis tinction on the materiality element of primary liability Sec Basic Inc Levinson, 485 U.S n.18 "Devising two different standards of materiality. one for situations where insiders have traded abrogation of their duly tr disclose or abstain (or for that matter when any closure has been breached) and another covering affirm ative misrepresentations those under no duty dis close 1nq) uncter the ever-present duty not to nislead). woulc effectively collapse the materiality requirement into the analysis defendant's disclosurc Sim- ...
(.png)
