# Private right of action

`kaal:entity:private-right-of-action`

**Status.** derived

This node is assembled mechanically from the 5 claims that carry the concept tag `private-right-of-action`. It is a roster of what the corpus says under this term. It is **not** an adjudicated definition: no single statement here has been ruled canonical, and no first-appearance call has been made. Read the claims and judge for yourself.

## Every claim under this term

5 claims across 2 works, 2011 to 2013.

**2011**

- [1765901-031](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1765901-031) [predictive/argued] -- Extending private rights of action extraterritorially would expose non-U.S. companies to Section 10(b) liability based on any U.S. conduct, including conduct inside U.S. business operations alleged to have produced securities fraud abroad, and much of global securities litigation would migrate to the United States.
  > Non-U.S. companies could be subject to liability under Section 10(b) if they have any conduct in the U.S. - for example conduct inside U.S. business operations — that could be alleged to have resulted in securities fraud outside the U.S.
  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
- [1765901-032](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1765901-032) [predictive/argued] -- A private right of action in foreign-cubed cases would compel EU companies to modify U.S. business operations that expose them to Section 10(b) litigation, including operations unrelated to U.S. securities markets or U.S. investors.
  > If Congress decided to impose a private right of action in foreign-cubed cases, EU companies could be compelled to modify their U.S. business operations that expose them to Section 10(b) litigation, including business operations that have nothing to do with U.S. securities markets
  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
- [1765901-034](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1765901-034) [normative/asserted] -- Regardless of what the SEC study concludes, Congress should decline to reinstate private rights of action in foreign-cubed cases.
  > An SEC study of private rights of action is also required by the Dodd-Frank Act, but regardless of the outcome of this study, Congress should decline to reinstate private rights of action in "foreign-cubed" cases.
  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
- [1765901-035](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1765901-035) [predictive/asserted] -- The SEC study is very unlikely to produce an extraterritorial extension of private rights of action so long as Republicans control the House of Representatives.
  > The SEC study, whatever it recommends, is very unlikely to result in extend- ing private rights of action extraterritorially so long as the Republicans control the House of Representatives.
  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

**2013**

- [2337268-040](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2337268-040) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Enforcement of the IAA's prohibited transactions provision is limited because the Supreme Court in Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis held that a violation of that provision does not support an implied private right of action.
  > The enforcement of a violation of prohibited transactions under the IAA is limited. In Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis107 the Supreme Court determined that a violation of the IAA's prohibited transactions provision108 does not allow for implied private rights of action.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Investment Adviser Regulation (2013). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2337268

## Verify

Every claim above resolves to a record carrying a verbatim source quote, the sha256 of the source PDF, and a preformatted citation. Nothing here asks to be taken on trust.

    curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/private-right-of-action.md | sha256sum

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of this entity node. Its sha256 is the content hash.