13 Cited authorities

  1. Shrader v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

    70 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 1995)   Cited 3,531 times
    Holding that court has no jurisdiction to review order where it is not mentioned in notice of appeal that expressly lists other orders
  2. Demaria v. Andersen

    318 F.3d 170 (2d Cir. 2003)   Cited 129 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "aftermarket purchasers" can have standing under Section 11 if they can trace their shares to the allegedly defective registration statement
  3. In re Global Crossing

    313 F. Supp. 2d 189 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)   Cited 125 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that § 14 claims are time barred because all of the allegedly misleading proxy statements were issued more than three years before the lawsuit was filed
  4. In re Countrywide Financial Corp. Securities Litigation

    588 F. Supp. 2d 1132 (C.D. Cal. 2008)   Cited 98 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding complaint persuasively alleges that "systematic changes in Countrywide came from the top down and pervaded virtually every office" because directors and officers allegedly were regularly provided "detailed exception statistics"
  5. In re American Intl. Group, Inc. 2008 Sec. Litig.

    741 F. Supp. 2d 511 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)   Cited 45 times
    Finding cautionary language insufficient “in light of the undisclosed hard facts critical to appreciating the magnitude of the risks described”
  6. In re Citigroup Inc. Bond Litigation

    723 F. Supp. 2d 568 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)   Cited 45 times
    Holding that if a registration statement contains an untrue statement of material fact, "then any person acquiring a security pursuant to that registration statement has standing to sue a variety of participants in the security's issuance" and citing 15 U.S.C. § 77k
  7. In re Wells Fargo Mortgage-Backed Certificates Litigation

    712 F. Supp. 2d 958 (N.D. Cal. 2010)   Cited 29 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that named plaintiffs, who had standing to sue based on misstatements or omissions in securities offerings through which they actually purchased securities, did not have standing to sue based on similar allegations relating to offerings through which they did not purchase securities
  8. Lee v. Ernst & Young, LLP

    294 F.3d 969 (8th Cir. 2002)   Cited 34 times
    Holding that standing under § 11 exists for those who can make a prima facie showing that the shares they purchased "can be traced to the registration statement alleged to be false and misleading"
  9. U.S. v. Oshatz

    912 F.2d 534 (2d Cir. 1990)   Cited 49 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that dicta in three-judge panel's opinion was binding precedent because it involved the court's supervisory authority over trial courts in that circuit
  10. United States v. Bell

    524 F.2d 202 (2d Cir. 1975)   Cited 59 times
    Distinguishing "between 'obiter dictum,' which constitutes an aside or an unnecessary extension of comments, and considered or 'judicial dictum' where Court, as in this case, is . . . [guiding] the future conduct of inferior courts."
  11. Section 77l - Civil liabilities arising in connection with prospectuses and communications

    15 U.S.C. § 77l   Cited 675 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing relief if the offering documents contain just one untrue statement of material fact
  12. Section 229.512 - (Item 512) Undertakings

    17 C.F.R. § 229.512   Cited 37 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the SEC's position is that indemnification to officers and directors for liabilities arising under the Securities Act is against public policy and such indemnification is unenforceable, with the exception for expenses incurred in successful defense of any action
  13. Section 230.415 - Delayed or continuous offering and sale of securities

    17 C.F.R. § 230.415   Cited 28 times
    Permitting registration of securities to be issued on a "continuous" or "delayed" basis