§Why CasetextPricing

Behrens et al v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N. A. et al

REPLY to Response to Motion re: 228 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint. . Document

21 Cited authorities

  1. Rotella v. Wood

    528 U.S. 549 (2000)   Cited 919 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding discovery rule inapplicable to § 2462 limitations period

  2. Koch v. Christie's International PLC

    699 F.3d 141 (2d Cir. 2012)   Cited 1,283 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that discovery accrual rule announced in Rotella continues to be controlling law

  3. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Manning

    578 U.S. 374 (2016)   Cited 233 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Grable & Sons test determines the reach of "arising under" jurisdiction for purposes of the jurisdictional grant in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

  4. Ryder Energy Dist. v. Merrill Lynch Commod

    748 F.2d 774 (2d Cir. 1984)   Cited 1,078 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Referring to motion to dismiss

  5. In re Merrill Lynch Ltd. Partnership Litigation

    154 F.3d 56 (2d Cir. 1998)   Cited 462 times
    Holding that plaintiffs were on inquiry notice as a matter of law where "disclosures in ... prospectuses and annual reports should have alerted ... investors that they had been misled"

  6. Klein Co. Futures, Inc. v. Board of Trade

    464 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 2006)   Cited 358 times
    Noting that private plaintiff must “fall within one of the four required relationships set forth in § 22(A–D)”

  7. State of N.Y. v. Hendrickson Bros., Inc.

    840 F.2d 1065 (2d Cir. 1988)   Cited 360 times
    Holding that, in cases of fraudulent concealment, "the plaintiff may prove the concealment element by showing either that the defendant took affirmative steps to prevent the plaintiff's discovery of his claim or injury or that the wrong itself was of such a nature as to be self-concealing."

  8. Gelboim v. Bank of Am. Corp.

    823 F.3d 759 (2d Cir. 2016)   Cited 139 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that this plus factor was established and helped the allegations of a conspiracy "clear the bar of plausibility" where the complaint alleged "a high number of interfirm communications, including Barclays’ knowledge of other banks’ confidential individual submissions in advance"

  9. Barbara v. New York Stock Exchange, Inc.

    99 F.3d 49 (2d Cir. 1996)   Cited 213 times
    Holding that federal jurisdiction over state claims could not be premised on § 78aa because that statute refers to claims created by the Exchange Act and rules promulgated thereunder, not to claims created by state law

  10. In re Libor-Based Fin. Instruments Antitrust Litig.

    935 F. Supp. 2d 666 (S.D.N.Y. 2013)   Cited 67 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs' allegations "sound[ed] in fraud and thus must be pled with particularity" where "the claim [was] that defendants, by submitting artificial LIBOR quotes, misled the market with regard to future levels of LIBOR, and by extension future prices of Eurodollar contracts, and thus caused Eurodollar contracts to trade at artificial prices."

  11. Section 25 - Private rights of action

    7 U.S.C. § 25   Cited 276 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Granting federal courts exclusive jurisdiction over private claims brought under the CEA

  12. Section 21 - Registered futures associations

    7 U.S.C. § 21   Cited 41 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that decisions of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission are reviewed by filing a petition in a court of appeals