kaal:claim:1765901-004

Morrison itself refutes a listing based reading of Section 10(b): the Court knew that National Australia Bank had registered and listed shares in New York, yet held that Section 10(b) did not reach trades in those ordinary shares in Australia.

The entire point of the Morrison opinion, however, is that Section 10(b) did not apply to trades in NAB's ordinary shares in Australia. This is inconsistent with a theory that the Court would apply Section 10(b) to any security listed on a U.S. exchange

Kaal and Painter, The Aftermath of Morrison v. National Australia Bank and Elliott Associates v. Porsche (2011), II. Open Questions After Morrison; 1. Does Section 10(b) Apply to Dually Listed Securities?, p. 5
https://ssrn.com/abstract=1765901 · source PDF

Kaal and Painter, The Aftermath of Morrison v. National Australia Bank and Elliott Associates v. Porsche (2011). SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1765901

• foreign issuers with U.S. registered ADRs or listed shares

failuresupport: arguedinstitutional-design

The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is 7b08b8a15f7d72b4eeed41be2d17c20428cb4727269077a6575c5d22e31ecdc5. Extraction method: ocr.
Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/cbae6b67d33f4f83...json
Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1765901-004.md | sha256sum