§Why CasetextPricing

Curran v. Freshpet, Inc. et al

BRIEF in Support

43 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 266,625 times   365 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

  2. Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights

    551 U.S. 308 (2007)   Cited 9,121 times   104 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 3,550 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. Ernst Ernst v. Hochfelder

    425 U.S. 185 (1976)   Cited 3,485 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Section 9(f) “contains a state-of-mind condition requiring something more than negligence”

  5. In re Burlington Coat Factory

    114 F.3d 1410 (3d Cir. 1997)   Cited 7,650 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court may consider a "document integral to or explicitly relied upon in the complaint" when deciding a motion to dismiss

  6. Morse v. Lower Merion School District

    132 F.3d 902 (3d Cir. 1997)   Cited 6,184 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because "the notion of deliberate indifference contemplates a danger that must at least be foreseeable," defendant cannot be said to have ignored a foreseeable risk or danger if plaintiff has not shown the existence of such a risk

  7. Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers Dist. Council Constr. Indus. Pension Fund

    575 U.S. 175 (2015)   Cited 457 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Holding in the context of a claim under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 that whether a statement is "misleading" is determined from "the perspective of a reasonable investor"

  8. Nami v. Fauver

    82 F.3d 63 (3d Cir. 1996)   Cited 2,464 times
    Holding that a Section 1983 plaintiff is only entitled to relief "if complaint sufficiently alleges deprivation of any right secured by the Constitution"

  9. In re NAHC, Inc. Securities Litigation

    306 F.3d 1314 (3d Cir. 2002)   Cited 704 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an amendment was futile because the claims would be barred by the statute of limitations

  10. Oran v. Stafford

    226 F.3d 275 (3d Cir. 2000)   Cited 628 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts can take judicial notice of authenticated versions of publicly available documents filed with a regulatory agency

  11. 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 345,885 times   922 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 38,923 times   316 Legal Analyses
    Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

  13. Section 78j - Manipulative and deceptive devices

    15 U.S.C. § 78j   Cited 12,504 times   165 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 78u-4 - Private securities litigation

    15 U.S.C. § 78u-4   Cited 7,465 times   48 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party

  15. Section 77k - Civil liabilities on account of false registration statement

    15 U.S.C. § 77k   Cited 2,113 times   85 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable for a false registration statement "every person who was a director of . . . or partner in the issuer" at time of filing

  16. Section 78u-5 - Application of safe harbor for forward-looking statements

    15 U.S.C. § 78u-5   Cited 1,258 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Noting that under the statutory safe harbor, a defendant may avoid liability for any forward-looking statement that is false or misleading if the statement is "identified as a forward-looking statement, and is accompanied by meaningful cautionary statements identifying important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statement"

  17. Section 77l - Civil liabilities arising in connection with prospectuses and communications

    15 U.S.C. § 77l   Cited 824 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing relief if the offering documents contain just one untrue statement of material fact

  18. Section 77z-2 - Application of safe harbor for forward-looking statements

    15 U.S.C. § 77z-2   Cited 185 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Defining "forward-looking" statements as statements that are projections about future financial status, future operations, and future economic performance

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

    17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5   Cited 9,197 times   133 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any person who "make any untrue statement of material fact"