# kaal:claim:1765901-018

**Claim.** For exchange traded securities, the location of the exchange rather than the location of the plaintiff's broker should be the controlling factor under Morrison, although it is uncertain whether all courts will adopt this bright line test.

**Type.** design  **Support.** argued

**Holds when.**

- exchange traded securities
- claims analyzed under Morrison

**Source quote.**

> location of the exchange, not the location of the plaintiff's broker, should be the controlling factor, but it remains to be seen whether this bright line test will in fact be the rule adopted by all courts.

**From.** Kaal and Painter, *The Aftermath of Morrison v. National Australia Bank and Elliott Associates v. Porsche* (2011), II. Open Questions After Morrison; 4. Does a Transaction Take Place in the U.S. if a U.S. Broker Is Involved?, page 16

**Cite as.** 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

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `7b08b8a15f7d72b4eeed41be2d17c20428cb4727269077a6575c5d22e31ecdc5` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20and%20Painter%20-%202011%20-%20The%20Aftermath%20of%20Morrison%20v.%20National%20Australia%20Bank%20and%20Elliott%20Associates%20v.%20Porsche.pdf

**Topics.** defi

**Keywords.** broker-location, bright-line-rule, exchange-location, morrison

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.