31 Cited authorities

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes
564 U.S. 338 (2011) Cited 6,675 times 505 Legal Analyses
Holding in Rule 23 context that “[w]ithout some glue holding the alleged reasons for all those decisions together, it will be impossible to say that examination of all the class members' claims for relief will produce a common answer”
Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd.
561 U.S. 247 (2010) Cited 1,470 times 177 Legal Analyses
Holding extraterritorial application of a statute is a merits question, not a question of subject matter jurisdiction
Erica P. John Fund, Inc. v. Halliburton Co.
563 U.S. 804 (2011) Cited 754 times 54 Legal Analyses
Holding that a plaintiff need not prove loss causation in order to obtain class certification
Miles v. Merrill Lynch & Co.
471 F.3d 24 (2d Cir. 2006) Cited 770 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding that district court must make a "definitive assessment of Rule 23 requirements" and "resolve[] . . . factual disputes relevant to each Rule 23 requirement"
Oran v. Stafford
226 F.3d 275 (3d Cir. 2000) Cited 630 times 33 Legal Analyses
Holding that courts can take judicial notice of authenticated versions of publicly available documents filed with a regulatory agency
Teamsters v. Bombardier
546 F.3d 196 (2d Cir. 2008) Cited 448 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the “preponderance of the evidence standard applies to evidence proffered to establish Rule 23's requirements”
In re Flag Telecom Holdings
574 F.3d 29 (2d Cir. 2009) Cited 354 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs' evidence of news events and the expert's event study did not provide sufficient evidence of causation
McLaughlin v. Tobacco Co.
522 F.3d 215 (2d Cir. 2008) Cited 305 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that an aggregate determination that “bears little or no relationship to the amount of economic harm actually caused” violates the Rules Enabling Act
Absolute Activist Value Master Fund Ltd. v. Ficeto
677 F.3d 60 (2d Cir. 2012) Cited 218 times 22 Legal Analyses
Holding that the complaint must sufficiently allege domestic purchases to state a claim under § 10(b)
UFCW Local 1776 v. Eli Lilly & Co.
620 F.3d 121 (2d Cir. 2010) Cited 136 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that "reliance by doctors on misrepresentations as to the efficacy [of a drug was] not a but-for cause of the price that TPPs ultimately paid for each prescription" because "prescribing doctors do not generally consider the price of the medication when deciding what to prescribe for an individual patient," and there was no proximate causation because TPPs, who "were in a position to negotiate the price paid for [the drug]," had failed to allege that they had relied on the defendant's fraudulent conduct
Rule 23 - Class Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Cited 35,111 times 1237 Legal Analyses
Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"
Section 77k - Civil liabilities on account of false registration statement
15 U.S.C. § 77k Cited 2,114 times 86 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
Section 230.424 - Filing of prospectuses, number of copies
17 C.F.R. § 230.424 Cited 14 times
Referring to 17 C.F.R. § 230.424(b)
Section 230.430B - Prospectus in a registration statement after effective date
17 C.F.R. § 230.430B Cited 12 times
Expanding the meaning of the "initial bona fide offering date" from the date of a post-effective registration statement amendment, to the date of a post-effective registration statement supplement, with regard to issuer and underwriter liability

In re: American International Group, Inc. 2008 Securities Litigation

31 Cited authorities

Holding in Rule 23 context that “[w]ithout some glue holding the alleged reasons for all those decisions together, it will be impossible to say that examination of all the class members' claims for relief will produce a common answer”

Holding extraterritorial application of a statute is a merits question, not a question of subject matter jurisdiction

Holding that a plaintiff need not prove loss causation in order to obtain class certification

Holding that district court must make a "definitive assessment of Rule 23 requirements" and "resolve[] . . . factual disputes relevant to each Rule 23 requirement"

Holding that courts can take judicial notice of authenticated versions of publicly available documents filed with a regulatory agency

Holding that the “preponderance of the evidence standard applies to evidence proffered to establish Rule 23's requirements”

Holding that plaintiffs' evidence of news events and the expert's event study did not provide sufficient evidence of causation

Holding that an aggregate determination that “bears little or no relationship to the amount of economic harm actually caused” violates the Rules Enabling Act

Holding that the complaint must sufficiently allege domestic purchases to state a claim under § 10(b)

Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"

Holding liable for a false registration statement "every person who was a director of . . . or partner in the issuer" at time of filing

Referring to 17 C.F.R. § 230.424(b)

Expanding the meaning of the "initial bona fide offering date" from the date of a post-effective registration statement amendment, to the date of a post-effective registration statement supplement, with regard to issuer and underwriter liability