Write your answer as if you were explaining your answer to someone who is learning the material for the first time;

Clearly answer the questions asked;

Explain your rationale behind your answer; and

Provide example$($s$)$ that justify, or further explain, your answer to the question where applicable.

Successful answers will incorporate all components.

Starla Doe, a Texas resident, purchased investment bonds from Midland$-$Houston Savings and Loan $("$Midland$")$ through an online investment account.

Midland experienced significant setbacks and was taken over by the Resolution Trust Corporation of the federal government. Starla's bonds are now worthless $($her total purchase price for the bonds was $$58,300).$

Starla's attorney advised her that she has a chance of recovery from the officers and directors for securities fraud under federal law. Specifically, the $1934$ Securities Exchange Act.

Starla's attorney recommends that she file suit under this law because it might allow for special damages if they can establish certain facts in court and there is no comparable law in any other applicable jurisdiction.

Despite its name, Midland is actually a Delaware corporation doing business with investors all over the country and no physical presence in Texas.

Based on those facts please answer the following two questions:

$1.$ In what court could Starla properly file her suit and why?; and

$2.$ When, if ever, could Starla's attorney disclose to others what they discussed about the strategy for the case? What limits$,$ if any, exist on such a disclosure? $($Please include a brief overview of the applicable doctrine$/$principle in your answer$)$