§Why CasetextPricing

IN RE: Bank of America Corp. Securities, Derivative and Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) Litigation

REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 589 MOTION for Summary Judgment

52 Cited authorities

  1. In re Burlington Coat Factory

    114 F.3d 1410 (3d Cir. 1997)   Cited 7,619 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

  2. Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc.

    316 F.3d 1048 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 4,862 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court abused its discretion because "[d]ismissal with prejudice and without leave to amend is not appropriate unless it is clear on de novo review that the complaint could not be saved by amendment"

  3. Virginia Bankshares, Inc. v. Sandberg

    501 U.S. 1083 (1991)   Cited 609 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Holding that § 14 liability may not be established on "mere disbelief or undisclosed motive without any demonstration that the proxy statement was false or misleading"

  4. Cruz v. Coach Stores, Inc.

    202 F.3d 560 (2d Cir. 2000)   Cited 1,586 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the plaintiff was not similarly situated to certain of her co-employees because the plaintiff had "engaged in a physical fight," while her co-employees' "behavior . . . involved words only"

  5. D'Amico v. the City of New York

    132 F.3d 145 (2d Cir. 1998)   Cited 1,099 times
    Holding that party opposing summary judgment "may not rely on mere conclusory allegations nor speculation, but instead must offer some hard evidence showing that its version of the events is not wholly fanciful"

  6. Aetna Cas. and Sur. v. Aniero Concrete

    404 F.3d 566 (2d Cir. 2005)   Cited 696 times
    Holding that a duty to disclose can arise when a party has made a partial or ambiguous statement

  7. Block v. First Blood Associates

    988 F.2d 344 (2d Cir. 1993)   Cited 951 times
    Holding that a grant of amendment was proper even with a four-year delay because the non-movant could not show prejudice

  8. Clomon v. Jackson

    988 F.2d 1314 (2d Cir. 1993)   Cited 899 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the least sophisticated consumer standard applies to whether § 1692e has been violated

  9. Teams. Local 445 v. Dynex Cap

    531 F.3d 190 (2d Cir. 2008)   Cited 447 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs failed to allege corporate scienter where they did not specifically identify reports or statements to which the corporate officer had access that would have contradicted the allegedly fraudulent corporate statements at issue

  10. Instit. Investors Group v. Avaya, Inc.

    564 F.3d 242 (3d Cir. 2009)   Cited 417 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the 'on track' and 'position us' portions of the [] statements, when read in context, cannot meaningfully be distinguished from the future projection of which they are a part"

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,160 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Rule 16 - Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 16   Cited 33,560 times   51 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the sanctions authorized by Rule 37(b)

  13. Rule 32 - Using Depositions in Court Proceedings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 32   Cited 2,296 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Setting forth requirements for using deposition testimony at trial

  14. Section 240.14a-9 - False or misleading statements

    17 C.F.R. § 240.14a-9   Cited 598 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Stating that a proxy statement shall not "contain any statement which, at the time and in the light of the circumstances under which it is made, is false or misleading with respect to any material fact, or which omits to state any material fact necessary in order to make the statements therein not false or misleading"