62 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 280,791 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
  2. Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights

    551 U.S. 308 (2007)   Cited 9,584 times   105 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"
  3. Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo

    544 U.S. 336 (2005)   Cited 3,635 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”
  4. Basic Inc. v. Levinson

    485 U.S. 224 (1988)   Cited 3,421 times   313 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the District Court appropriately certified the class based on the presumption of reliance
  5. ATSI Communications, Inc. v. Shaar Fund, Ltd.

    493 F.3d 87 (2d Cir. 2007)   Cited 4,023 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because "a plaintiff must show . . . a primary violation by the controlled person" in order to "establish a prima facie case of control[-]person liability," a plaintiff who "fails to allege any primary violation . . . cannot establish control[-]person liability"
  6. McCarthy v. Dun & Bradstreet Corp.

    482 F.3d 184 (2d Cir. 2007)   Cited 3,385 times
    Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend where "discovery had closed, defendants had filed for summary judgment, and nearly two years had passed since the filing of the original complaint"
  7. Chiarella v. United States

    445 U.S. 222 (1980)   Cited 991 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that duty to disclose under Rule 10b-5 arises from fiduciary relationship
  8. Novak v. Kasaks

    216 F.3d 300 (2d Cir. 2000)   Cited 1,638 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding section 78u-4(b) does not literally require pleading of all facts, so long as facts pleaded provide adequate basis for believing statements were false
  9. Sparling v. Daou

    411 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 1,317 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that scienter is an element of § 10(b) claim
  10. Rothman v. Gregor

    220 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 2000)   Cited 1,372 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the date of the filing of the motion to amend constitutes the date the action was commenced for statute of limitations purposes" when "the plaintiff seeks to add a new defendant" (quoting Nw. Nat’l Ins. Co. v. Alberts , 769 F. Supp. 498, 510 (S.D.N.Y.1991) )
  11. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 164,455 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
  12. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 40,207 times   337 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity
  13. Section 78j - Manipulative and deceptive devices

    15 U.S.C. § 78j   Cited 12,808 times   167 Legal Analyses
    Granting SEC power to establish rules to further statute forbidding manipulative or deceptive devices in connection with purchase or sale of securities
  14. Section 240.10b-5 - Employment of manipulative and deceptive devices

    17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5   Cited 9,421 times   136 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any person who "make any untrue statement of material fact"