October Term 2007 · Docket 06-43

Can investors sue third-party vendors for aiding securities fraud?

Investors seek damages from a vendor that allegedly helped a company inflate earnings. The vendor argues federal law bars such suits.

Official caption
Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., ET AL
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Grossman argued the statute bans any deceptive device in securities trades.

    Mr. Shapiro argued the investors seek to expand an implied cause of action.

    Mr. Hungar argued the lower court correctly applied prior precedent.

    Mr. Grossman questioned why a contract existed if the advertising cost nothing.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the scope of federal securities fraud laws. It asks whether private investors can sue third parties who aid a company in misleading shareholders.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 9, 2007.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Investors want to recover money lost from alleged fraud.

The vendor wants the lawsuit dismissed to avoid liability.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Investors argue the law bans all deceptive acts in securities trades.

The vendor argues prior precedent bars private suits against third parties.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Chief Justice Roberts asked if the vendor knew the company would use the data.

Justice Scalia asked what specific facts prove the vendor intended to defraud.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This dispute defines who investors can sue for securities fraud. It shapes the reach of federal anti-fraud protections for shareholders.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON