§Why CasetextPricing

Absolute Activist Value Master Fund Limited et al v. Ficeto et al

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER: Plaintiff Funds bring this action against principals and employees of the company they engaged to manage their assets, Absolute Capital Management

80 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 263,882 times   281 Legal Analyses
    Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 277,112 times   369 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

  3. Goodyear Dunlop Tires Oper. v. Brown

    564 U.S. 915 (2011)   Cited 5,492 times   88 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the sales of petitioners' tires sporadically made in North Carolina through intermediaries" insufficient to support general jurisdiction

  4. Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz

    471 U.S. 462 (1985)   Cited 17,225 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a defendant has "fair warning" if he purposefully directs his activities at residents of the forum and if the litigation results from alleged injuries arising out of or relating to those activities.

  5. Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo

    544 U.S. 336 (2005)   Cited 3,618 times   67 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the securities statutes have a private of action “not to provide investors with broad insurance against market losses, but to protect them against those economic losses that misrepresentations actually cause”

  6. Helicopteros Nacionales de Colom. v. Hall

    466 U.S. 408 (1984)   Cited 9,417 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “purchases, even if occurring at regular intervals” were insufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction over a nonresident corporation

  7. World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson

    444 U.S. 286 (1980)   Cited 11,014 times   32 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

  8. Asahi Metal Indus. Co. Ltd. v. Superior Court

    480 U.S. 102 (1987)   Cited 4,952 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in suit by Taiwanese manufacturer for indemnification against Japanese manufacturer, the assertion by California court of personal jurisdiction over Japanese manufacturer was unreasonable

  9. Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd.

    561 U.S. 247 (2010)   Cited 1,500 times   178 Legal Analyses
    Holding extraterritorial application of a statute is a merits question, not a question of subject matter jurisdiction

  10. J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro

    564 U.S. 873 (2011)   Cited 1,383 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a metal-shearing machine manufacturer based in England that engaged an independent distributor to sell its machines across the U.S. was not subject to personal jurisdiction in New Jersey where the plaintiff was injured while using one of the company's machines

  11. Rule 4 - Summons

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 4   Cited 72,489 times   129 Legal Analyses
    Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

  12. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 39,914 times   332 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  13. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 23,110 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Providing for service via CM/ECF Systems

  14. Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation

    15 U.S.C. § 78u-4   Cited 7,674 times   52 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party

  15. Section 78t - Liability of controlling persons and persons who aid and abet violations

    15 U.S.C. § 78t   Cited 4,055 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any person "who, directly or indirectly, controls any person liable under any provision of this chapter or of any rule or regulation thereunder"

  16. Section 1658 - Time limitations on the commencement of civil actions arising under Acts of Congress

    28 U.S.C. § 1658   Cited 2,414 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the state-law tort period controls § 1983 actions

  17. Section 78u - Investigations and actions

    15 U.S.C. § 78u   Cited 2,371 times   86 Legal Analyses
    Granting the SEC the power to seek civil penalties for violations of the Exchange Act

  18. Section 78aa - Jurisdiction of offenses and suits

    15 U.S.C. § 78aa   Cited 2,344 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Granting "[t]he district courts of the United States . . . exclusive jurisdiction [over] violations of [the Exchange Act of 1934] or the rules and regulations thereunder, and of all suits in equity and actions at law brought to enforce any liability or duty created by [the Exchange Act of 1934] or the rules and regulations thereunder."

  19. Section 240.10b-5 - Employment of manipulative and deceptive devices

    17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5   Cited 9,344 times   136 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any person who "make any untrue statement of material fact"