46 Cited authorities

Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo
544 U.S. 336 (2005) Cited 3,544 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”
Basic Inc. v. Levinson
485 U.S. 224 (1988) Cited 3,343 times 307 Legal Analyses
Holding that the District Court appropriately certified the class based on the presumption of reliance
Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA
317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 4,192 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Rule 9(b) pleading standards apply to California CLRA, FAL, and UCL claims because, though fraud is not an essential element of those statutes, a plaintiff alleges a fraudulent course of conduct as the basis of those claims
Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores
421 U.S. 723 (1975) Cited 2,070 times 26 Legal Analyses
Holding that only purchasers and sellers of a security have a private right of action under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b–5
Yourish v. California Amplifier
191 F.3d 983 (9th Cir. 1999) Cited 3,635 times
Holding that a district court that had granted leave to amend the complaint did not abuse its discretion by dismissing entire action when plaintiff failed to replace a defective complaint
Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis
444 U.S. 11 (1979) Cited 1,332 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that Congress did not provide a private right of action for § 80b-6 because the statute expressly provided other means of enforcing compliance with its terms
Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.
20 Cal.4th 163 (Cal. 1999) Cited 2,419 times 23 Legal Analyses
Holding that for an act to be "unfair," it must "threaten" a violation of law or "violate the policy or spirit of one of those laws because its effects are comparable to or the same as a violation of the law"
In re Glenfed, Inc. Securities Litigation
42 F.3d 1541 (9th Cir. 1994) Cited 1,712 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs may not "merely proclaim in the most conclusory of fashion that the defendants made false statements."
In re Silicon Graphics Inc.
183 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 1999) Cited 1,410 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that stock sales of individual defendants are only indicative of scienter where they are "dramatically out of line with prior trading practices" (quoting In re Apple Computer Sec. Litig., 886 F.2d 1109, 1117 (9th Cir. 1989))
Thompson v. Illinois Dept. of Prof. Regulation
300 F.3d 750 (7th Cir. 2002) Cited 1,016 times
Holding district court did not abuse its discretion when plaintiff failed to cure deficiencies that persisted from the first amended complaint after given multiple chances to amend after motions to dismiss were filed
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 344,855 times 920 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 Cited 38,849 times 316 Legal Analyses
Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"
Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined
Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 Cited 17,800 times 315 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting unlawful business practices
Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation
15 U.S.C. § 78u-4 Cited 7,446 times 48 Legal Analyses
Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party
Section 1658 - Time limitations on the commencement of civil actions arising under Acts of Congress
28 U.S.C. § 1658 Cited 2,372 times 41 Legal Analyses
Holding that the state-law tort period controls § 1983 actions
Section 8106 - Actions subject to 3-year limitation
Del. Code tit. 10 § 8106 Cited 837 times 12 Legal Analyses
Specifying causes of action subject to 3-year statute of limitations as including "action to recover damages caused by an injury unaccompanied with force or resulting indirectly from the act of the defendant"
Section 80b-6 - Prohibited transactions by investment advisers
15 U.S.C. § 80b-6 Cited 643 times 20 Legal Analyses
Making it unlawful for investment advisers to, among other things, defraud their clients or prospective clients
Section 80b-1 - Findings
15 U.S.C. § 80b-1 Cited 249 times 10 Legal Analyses
Finding that investment advisory activities affect interstate commerce

Amisil Holdings Ltd v. Clarium Capital Management LLC et al

46 Cited authorities

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”

Holding that the District Court appropriately certified the class based on the presumption of reliance

Holding that the Rule 9(b) pleading standards apply to California CLRA, FAL, and UCL claims because, though fraud is not an essential element of those statutes, a plaintiff alleges a fraudulent course of conduct as the basis of those claims

Holding that only purchasers and sellers of a security have a private right of action under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b–5

Holding that a district court that had granted leave to amend the complaint did not abuse its discretion by dismissing entire action when plaintiff failed to replace a defective complaint

Holding that Congress did not provide a private right of action for § 80b-6 because the statute expressly provided other means of enforcing compliance with its terms

Holding that for an act to be "unfair," it must "threaten" a violation of law or "violate the policy or spirit of one of those laws because its effects are comparable to or the same as a violation of the law"

Holding that plaintiffs may not "merely proclaim in the most conclusory of fashion that the defendants made false statements."

Holding that stock sales of individual defendants are only indicative of scienter where they are "dramatically out of line with prior trading practices" (quoting In re Apple Computer Sec. Litig., 886 F.2d 1109, 1117 (9th Cir. 1989))

Holding district court did not abuse its discretion when plaintiff failed to cure deficiencies that persisted from the first amended complaint after given multiple chances to amend after motions to dismiss were filed

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

Prohibiting unlawful business practices

Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party

Holding that the state-law tort period controls § 1983 actions

Specifying causes of action subject to 3-year statute of limitations as including "action to recover damages caused by an injury unaccompanied with force or resulting indirectly from the act of the defendant"

Making it unlawful for investment advisers to, among other things, defraud their clients or prospective clients

Finding that investment advisory activities affect interstate commerce