|
|
|
|
|
by panarky
689 days ago
|
|
It doesn't presume that shareholders are altruistic. It presumes that shareholders' only objective is to maximize the share price. From Wells Fargo's reports to investors, it's clear that management believed that investors would interpret successful diversity efforts as important to maximize the share price. After the diversity rules were suspended, the share price dropped. It's nearly impossible to prove cause and effect, but the plaintiffs don't have to prove direct causation. They only have to show that management misrepresented the facts in reports to investors, that the false statements were material, and that investors suffered a loss at that time. |
|