444 U.S. 286 (1980) Cited 9,618 times 15 Legal Analyses
Holding that an Oklahoma court could not exercise personal jurisdiction over a car retailer when the retailer's only connection to Oklahoma was the fact that a car sold in New York became involved in an accident in Oklahoma
Holding that to prove loss causation, a plaintiff must allege "that the misstatement or omission concealed something from the market that, when disclosed, negatively affected the value of the security"
246 F. Supp. 3d 731 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) Cited 35 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a list of reasons for the low price the defendant had paid for a good was plausibly misleading because it omitted a "key factor, the bribery-affected side deal" with the supplier and therefore amounted to "a classic half-truth"
277 F. Supp. 3d 600 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) Cited 34 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that aspirational statements about a code of conduct in this context were material because "they were made in an effort to reassure the investing public about the Company's integrity, specifically with respect to bribery, during a time of concern"