Basic Inc. v. Levinson
E590642
Basic Inc. v. Levinson is a landmark 1988 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the fraud-on-the-market theory and clarified the materiality standard for misstatements in securities fraud class actions.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Basic Inc. v. Levinson canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T6409120 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Basic Inc. v. Levinson Context triple: [Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, relatedCaseLaw, Basic Inc. v. Levinson]
-
A.
Lucas v. Earl
Lucas v. Earl is a landmark 1930 U.S. Supreme Court tax law case that established the principle that income is taxed to the person who earns it, regardless of contractual arrangements to split or assign that income.
-
B.
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger v. Hamlin is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the right to counsel to defendants in misdemeanor cases that may result in imprisonment.
-
C.
Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins
Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins is a landmark 1980 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that states may grant broader free speech rights in private shopping centers under their own constitutions than those guaranteed by the federal Constitution.
-
D.
Hicklin v. Orbeck
Hicklin v. Orbeck is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down Alaska’s local-hire law for violating the Privileges and Immunities Clause by discriminating against nonresident workers.
-
E.
Ray v. Blair
Ray v. Blair is a 1952 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a state's authority to require presidential electors to pledge support for their party's nominees as a condition of appointment.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Basic Inc. v. Levinson Target entity description: Basic Inc. v. Levinson is a landmark 1988 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the fraud-on-the-market theory and clarified the materiality standard for misstatements in securities fraud class actions.
-
A.
Lucas v. Earl
Lucas v. Earl is a landmark 1930 U.S. Supreme Court tax law case that established the principle that income is taxed to the person who earns it, regardless of contractual arrangements to split or assign that income.
-
B.
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger v. Hamlin is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the right to counsel to defendants in misdemeanor cases that may result in imprisonment.
-
C.
Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins
Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins is a landmark 1980 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that states may grant broader free speech rights in private shopping centers under their own constitutions than those guaranteed by the federal Constitution.
-
D.
Hicklin v. Orbeck
Hicklin v. Orbeck is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down Alaska’s local-hire law for violating the Privileges and Immunities Clause by discriminating against nonresident workers.
-
E.
Ray v. Blair
Ray v. Blair is a 1952 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a state's authority to require presidential electors to pledge support for their party's nominees as a condition of appointment.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
class action securities fraud case ⓘ securities law case ⓘ |
| appliesTo |
open and developed securities markets
ⓘ
publicly traded securities ⓘ |
| category |
United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court cases on securities law ⓘ |
| citation | 485 U.S. 224 ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate |
1988
ⓘ
March 7, 1988 ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 86-279 ⓘ |
| holding |
adopted the fraud-on-the-market theory for securities fraud class actions
ⓘ
materiality of merger discussions depends on probability and magnitude ⓘ presumption of reliance is available to plaintiffs in an efficient market ⓘ rejected a bright-line rule that preliminary merger discussions are immaterial as a matter of law ⓘ |
| influencedCase |
Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Erica P. John Fund, Inc. v. Halliburton Co. NERFINISHED ⓘ Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| issue |
whether preliminary merger negotiations must be disclosed under federal securities laws
ⓘ
whether reliance can be presumed in securities fraud class actions based on market price ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| keyQuestion |
what constitutes a material misrepresentation or omission in the context of merger negotiations
ⓘ
whether market price can serve as a proxy for investor reliance ⓘ |
| language | English ⓘ |
| legalArea |
class actions
ⓘ
federal securities fraud ⓘ securities regulation ⓘ |
| legalDoctrine |
fraud-on-the-market theory
ⓘ
presumption of reliance in open and developed securities markets ⓘ probability-magnitude test for materiality ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | Justice Harry A. Blackmun NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| materialityStandard | probability-magnitude balancing test ⓘ |
| petitioner | Basic Incorporated NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatesToConcept |
class certification in securities cases
ⓘ
efficient capital market hypothesis ⓘ materiality in securities fraud ⓘ |
| respondent | Max L. Levinson NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| result | judgment of the Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part ⓘ |
| statuteInterpreted |
SEC Rule 10b-5
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 NERFINISHED ⓘ Securities Exchange Act of 1934 NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| subsequentHistory | followed and applied in numerous federal securities fraud class actions ⓘ |
| term | 1987 Term ⓘ |
| vote | 6-3 decision ⓘ |
| yearArgued | 1987 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Basic Inc. v. Levinson Description of subject: Basic Inc. v. Levinson is a landmark 1988 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the fraud-on-the-market theory and clarified the materiality standard for misstatements in securities fraud class actions.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.