⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Seventh Circuit considers where Elizabeth Coffey's securities-fraud suit against Kerrisdale Capital Management can be heard. Coffey and another investor sold shares of C3.ai after reading a letter from Kerrisdale, a short-selling investment fund, accusing the company of deceptive accounting. Short sellers can profit when a stock's price falls. The investors accuse the fund and its chief of deliberately misleading the market for profit. Those are allegations, not findings of fraud. The letter appeared online, and the fund's chief discussed it on television. Coffey received the letter in Illinois, and the investors sued there. But the district judge dismissed the case for improper venue: the rules about which federal district is a proper place to bring a lawsuit. The judge did not decide whether the letter was fraudulent. The investors' lawyer will argue that the report's broad distribution and an investor's receipt and reliance in Illinois connect the alleged violation to that district. Kerrisdale's lawyer will argue that national internet and television exposure does not specifically target Illinois, and cannot make every district a proper venue. Listen for the distinction between where a fraud claim may proceed and whether fraud has been proved.

Coffey v. Kerrisdale Capital Management (No. 26-1974) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, argued November 4, 2026.