The phrase "a material misrepresentation" is correct and usable in written English.
It is typically used in legal contexts to refer to a false statement that is significant enough to influence a decision or outcome.
Example: "The contract was voided due to a material misrepresentation made by the seller regarding the property's condition."
Alternatives: "a significant falsehood" or "an important misstatement".
Therefore, the fraud-on-the-market theory cannot apply absent a material misrepresentation or omission.
If she told a customs official she was entering the United States as a visitor but was planning to work, that's a material misrepresentation.
If an executive or analyst makes a material misrepresentation, we can presume that investors relied upon it in purchasing the stock.
And any contract can be voided if it was induced by a material misrepresentation — such as Theranos's overstating the capabilities of its nanotechnology — even if it was an innocent mistake.
The complaint would be based on the unit owners' allegation that the developer made a material misrepresentation in the offering plan by delivering a unit that had defects in construction.
"It's always fraudulent when you have a material misrepresentation, deliberately made, with the intent to deceive and for personal gain," said Gil M. Soffer, who oversees corporate fraud prosecutions at the Justice Department.
Litigants can expect that the Court of Chancery only will approve future disclosure-only settlements if the disclosures "address a plainly material misrepresentation or omission," and the releases granted in connection with the settlement are limited to disclosure claims.
If a market is generally efficient in incorporating publicly available information into a security's market price, it is reasonable to presume that a particular public, material misrepresentation will be reflected in the security's price.
But I hope you can find it in your hearts to rule that my client did not make any material misrepresentations of fact in its dealings with the Police Wives' Pension Association, just as my client has found it in its heart not to foreclose on your homes, yet.
In Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo, the Supreme Court held that in private securities fraud cases, one element of proving a violation is "loss causation," which requires showing "a causal connection between the material misrepresentation and the loss".
In my view, however, the Basic rule of fraud-on-the-market — a well functioning market plus purchase or sale in the market plus material misrepresentation known to the market establishes a necessary showing of reliance — governs not only the question of substantive liability, but also the question whether certification is proper.
