§Why CasetextPricing

Costello v. Poisella

RESPONSE

91 Cited authorities

  1. United States v. Mead Corp.

    533 U.S. 218 (2001)   Cited 2,620 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a Customs classification ruling "has no claim to judicial deference under Chevron " but can "claim respect according to its persuasiveness"

  2. Janus Capital Group Inc. v. First Derivative Traders

    564 U.S. 135 (2011)   Cited 582 times   104 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a mutual fund adviser may not be found liable for a mutual fund's violation of SEC Rule 10b–5, in part because of “the narrow scope that [courts] must give the implied private right of action”

  3. O'Melveny & Myers v. Federal Deposit Insurance

    512 U.S. 79 (1994)   Cited 903 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that federal statutory scheme detailing what claims could be made against the FDIC when it is acting as receiver necessarily excluded claims not mentioned in the statute

  4. Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite

    396 U.S. 375 (1970)   Cited 1,416 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that causation of damages by materially misleading proxy misstatement could be established by showing that proxy solicitation was an "essential link in the accomplishment of the transaction"

  5. Kowal v. MCI Communications Corp.

    16 F.3d 1271 (D.C. Cir. 1994)   Cited 1,834 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that statements of optimism give rise to a strong inference of scienter if they lacked a reasonable basis when made

  6. Lentell v. Merrill Lynch Co., Inc.

    396 F.3d 161 (2d Cir. 2005)   Cited 1,018 times   20 Legal Analyses
    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"

  7. Mobil Oil Corp. v. Higginbotham

    436 U.S. 618 (1978)   Cited 399 times
    Holding that courts are not free to supplement congressional enactments with federal common law

  8. In re Sofamor Danek Grp., Inc.

    123 F.3d 394 (6th Cir. 1997)   Cited 455 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that this Court does not accept "the bare assertion of legal conclusions" or "unwarranted factual inferences" when determining if a plaintiff has stated a claim

  9. Kushner v. Beverly Enterprises, Inc.

    317 F.3d 820 (8th Cir. 2003)   Cited 324 times
    Holding that an allegation that someone involved in a fraudulent scheme reported to one of the named defendants was "not specific enough to support a strong inference that [the defendant] knew of or participated in the fraudulent practice while it was occurring"

  10. City of Monroe Employees v. Bridgestone

    399 F.3d 651 (6th Cir. 2005)   Cited 290 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the issue of personal jurisdiction deals with "amenability to suit in a particular forum"

  11. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 39,889 times   331 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  12. Section 78j - Manipulative and deceptive devices

    15 U.S.C. § 78j   Cited 12,721 times   166 Legal Analyses
    Granting SEC power to establish rules to further statute forbidding manipulative or deceptive devices in connection with purchase or sale of securities

  13. Section 77q - Fraudulent interstate transactions

    15 U.S.C. § 77q   Cited 3,399 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting the use of "any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud" in connection with the offer or sale of any security

  14. Section 78cc - Validity of contracts

    15 U.S.C. § 78cc   Cited 546 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Providing a contract is void where "the performance of [it] involves the violation of" the Exchange Act or regulations promulgated under its authority

  15. Section 78g - Margin requirements

    15 U.S.C. § 78g   Cited 251 times

    (a) Rules and regulations for extension of credit; standard for initial extension; undermargined accounts For the purpose of preventing the excessive use of credit for the purchase or carrying of securities, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System shall, prior to October 1, 1934, and from time to time thereafter, prescribe rules and regulations with respect to the amount of credit that may be initially extended and subsequently maintained on any security (other than an exempted security

  16. Section 810 ILCS 5/8-301 - Delivery

    810 ILCS 5/8-301   Cited 7 times

    (a) Delivery of a certificated security to a purchaser occurs when: (1) the purchaser acquires possession of the security certificate; (2) another person, other than a securities intermediary, either acquires possession of the security certificate on behalf of the purchaser or, having previously acquired possession of the certificate, acknowledges that it holds for the purchaser; or (3) a securities intermediary acting on behalf of the purchaser acquires possession of the security certificate, only

  17. Section 810 ILCS 5/8-101 - Short title

    810 ILCS 5/8-101   Cited 6 times

    This Article may be cited as Uniform Commercial Code--Investment Securities. 810 ILCS 5/8-101 P.A. 89-364, eff. 1/1/1996.

  18. Section 810 ILCS 5/9-106 - Control of investment property

    810 ILCS 5/9-106   Cited 4 times

    (a) Control under Section 8-106. A person has control of a certificated security, uncertificated security, or security entitlement as provided in Section 8-106. (b) Control of commodity contract. A secured party has control of a commodity contract if: (1) the secured party is the commodity intermediary with which the commodity contract is carried; or (2) the commodity customer, secured party, and commodity intermediary have agreed that the commodity intermediary will apply any value distributed on

  19. Section 810 ILCS 5/8-106 - [Effective Until 1/1/2025] Control

    810 ILCS 5/8-106

    (a) A purchaser has "control" of a certificated security in bearer form if the certificated security is delivered to the purchaser. (b) A purchaser has "control" of a certificated security in registered form if the certificated security is delivered to the purchaser, and: (1) the certificate is indorsed to the purchaser or in blank by an effective indorsement; or (2) the certificate is registered in the name of the purchaser, upon original issue or registration of transfer by the issuer. (c) A purchaser

  20. Section 810 ILCS 5/8-305 - Instruction

    810 ILCS 5/8-305

    (a) If an instruction has been originated by an appropriate person but is incomplete in any other respect, any person may complete it as authorized and the issuer may rely on it as completed, even though it has been completed incorrectly. (b) Unless otherwise agreed, a person initiating an instruction assumes only the obligations imposed by Section 8-108 and not an obligation that the security will be honored by the issuer. 810 ILCS 5/8-305 P.A. 89-364, eff. 1/1/1996.

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

    17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5   Cited 9,341 times   136 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any person who "make any untrue statement of material fact"

  22. Section 221.3 - General requirements

    12 C.F.R. § 221.3   Cited 36 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Requiring a bank when extending credit secured directly or indirectly by margin stock in an amount exceeding $100,000 to obtain an executed Form FR U-1 from its customer

  23. Section 207.3 - CRA communications

    12 C.F.R. § 207.3   Cited 7 times

    (a)Definition of CRA communication. A CRA communication is any of the following- (1) Any written or oral comment or testimony provided to a Federal banking agency concerning the adequacy of the performance under the CRA of the insured depository institution, any affiliated insured depository institution, or any CRA affiliate. (2) Any written comment submitted to the insured depository institution that discusses the adequacy of the performance under the CRA of the institution and must be included

  24. Section 221.113 - Loan which is secured indirectly by stock

    12 C.F.R. § 221.113   Cited 2 times

    (a) A question has been presented to the Board as to whether a loan by a bank to a mutual investment fund is "secured * * * indirectly by margin stock" within the meaning of § 221.(3)(a), so that the loan should be treated as subject to this part. (b) Briefly, the facts are as follows. Fund X, an open-end investment company, entered into a loan agreement with Bank Y, which was (and still is) custodian of the securities which comprise the portfolio of Fund X. The agreement includes the following terms