§Why CasetextPricing

Friedman v. Penson Worldwide, Inc. et al

MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF THE REVALONG CAPITAL LIMITED FUNDS MOTION FOR

13 Cited authorities

  1. Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights

    551 U.S. 308 (2007)   Cited 9,131 times   104 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"

  2. Mullen v. Treasure Chest Casino

    186 F.3d 620 (5th Cir. 1999)   Cited 390 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court "reasonably presumed that those potential class members still employer by [the defendant employer] might be unwilling to sue individually or join a suit for fear of retaliation at their jobs" such that class certification was proper

  3. Berger v. Compaq Comput. Corp.

    257 F.3d 475 (5th Cir. 2001)   Cited 270 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that district court erred by shifting burden to defendants to show that class representatives were inadequate

  4. James v. City of Dall.

    254 F.3d 551 (5th Cir. 2001)   Cited 241 times
    Seeking removal of liens and the clearing of titles

  5. In re Olsten Corp. Securities Litg.

    3 F. Supp. 2d 286 (E.D.N.Y. 1998)   Cited 162 times
    Consolidating cases with different, but overlapping, class periods

  6. Gluck v. Cellstar Corporation

    976 F. Supp. 542 (N.D. Tex. 1997)   Cited 101 times
    Finding that proposed lead plaintiff need only make a "preliminary showing" that it satisfies Rule 23 requirements for class certification

  7. In re BP, PLC Securities Litigation

    758 F. Supp. 2d 428 (S.D. Tex. 2010)   Cited 25 times
    Concluding that it would be "inappropriate to narrow the class period at this stage of the litigation"

  8. In re Waste Management, Inc. Securities Litigation

    128 F. Supp. 2d 401 (S.D. Tex. 2000)   Cited 37 times
    Holding that account manager may serve as lead plaintiff because it demonstrated that it functioned as a single investor

  9. Strougo v. Brantley Capital Corp.

    243 F.R.D. 100 (S.D.N.Y. 2007)   Cited 22 times

    [Copyrighted Material Omitted] Robert I. Harwood, Wechsler Harwood LLP, New York, NY, for Plaintiffs. DECISION AND ORDER ROBINSON, District Judge. I. Background A. Procedural History Barbara Strougo (" Strougo" ) filed suit on November 17, 2006 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 on behalf of herself and all others who purchased or otherwise acquired shares of Brantley Capital Corporation (" Brantley" ) between August 14, 2003 and October 24, 2005 (the " Class Period" ).

  10. Buettgen v. Harless

    263 F.R.D. 378 (N.D. Tex. 2009)   Cited 10 times
    Holding Swiss entity was inadequate to be lead plaintiff because of res judicata concerns

  11. Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation

    15 U.S.C. § 78u-4   Cited 7,471 times   48 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party