18 Cited authorities

Mullane v. Central Hanover Tr. Co.
339 U.S. 306 (1950) Cited 10,580 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that due process requires a hearing "appropriate to the nature of the case"
In re Cendant Corp. Litigation
264 F.3d 201 (3d Cir. 2001) Cited 742 times
Holding that the PSLRA is clear that "the power to `select and retain' lead counsel belongs . . . to the lead plaintiff, and the court's role is confined to deciding whether to `approve' that choice" and that should the court disagree with the lead plaintiffs choice "it should clearly state why . . . and should direct the lead plaintiff to undertake an acceptable selection process"
In re Cavanaugh
306 F.3d 726 (9th Cir. 2002) Cited 366 times
Holding that that options traders can satisfy the typicality requirement and serve as a lead plaintiff
Eggleston v. Chi. Journeymen Plumbers' Local Union No. 130
657 F.2d 890 (7th Cir. 1981) Cited 594 times
Holding that a parent corporation not named in an EEOC charge could not be sued under Title VII because, although it had notice of the suit of its subsidiary, it did not know of charges against itself nor did it have an opportunity to participate in conciliation on its own behalf.
Weiss v. York Hosp
745 F.2d 786 (3d Cir. 1984) Cited 446 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that coordinated actions by group of doctors, although each "an independent economic entity in competition with other doctors . . . . are subject to scrutiny under Section 1 of the Sherman Act"
Perry v. Commerce Loan Co.
383 U.S. 392 (1966) Cited 147 times
Finding that when the plain meaning "has led to absurd or futile results" courts have reasonably followed the purpose, rather than the literal words
Certiorari Denied
535 U.S. 929 (2002) Cited 31 times
Stating that "parties have an obligation to monitor the docket sheet and inform themselves of the entry of orders . . ."
Weinberg v. Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings, Inc.
216 F.R.D. 248 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) Cited 71 times 1 Legal Analyses
Rejecting joint application of an individual investor and an institutional plaintiff because there is "no need to have them both as Lead Plaintiff"
Greebel v. FTP Software, Inc.
939 F. Supp. 57 (D. Mass. 1996) Cited 72 times
Holding that only named plaintiffs, rather than all parties moving for appointment as lead plaintiff, need comply with the certification requirement
Takeda v. Turbodyne Technologies, Inc.
67 F. Supp. 2d 1129 (C.D. Cal. 1999) Cited 50 times
Finding slightly different class periods do not preclude a finding of typicality because varying class periods may be harmonized
Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation
15 U.S.C. § 78u-4 Cited 7,803 times 54 Legal Analyses
Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party

Brumbaugh v. Wave Systems Corporation et al

18 Cited authorities

Holding that due process requires a hearing "appropriate to the nature of the case"

Holding that that options traders can satisfy the typicality requirement and serve as a lead plaintiff

Holding that a parent corporation not named in an EEOC charge could not be sued under Title VII because, although it had notice of the suit of its subsidiary, it did not know of charges against itself nor did it have an opportunity to participate in conciliation on its own behalf.

Holding that coordinated actions by group of doctors, although each "an independent economic entity in competition with other doctors . . . . are subject to scrutiny under Section 1 of the Sherman Act"

Finding that when the plain meaning "has led to absurd or futile results" courts have reasonably followed the purpose, rather than the literal words

Stating that "parties have an obligation to monitor the docket sheet and inform themselves of the entry of orders . . ."

Rejecting joint application of an individual investor and an institutional plaintiff because there is "no need to have them both as Lead Plaintiff"

Holding that only named plaintiffs, rather than all parties moving for appointment as lead plaintiff, need comply with the certification requirement

Finding slightly different class periods do not preclude a finding of typicality because varying class periods may be harmonized

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