65 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 255,028 times 280 Legal Analyses
Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 268,776 times 367 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' "
Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights
551 U.S. 308 (2007) Cited 9,189 times 104 Legal Analyses
Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"
TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc.
426 U.S. 438 (1976) Cited 2,484 times 67 Legal Analyses
Holding that materiality may be resolved at summary judgment "if the established omissions are so obviously important to an investor that reasonable minds cannot differ on the question of materiality"
Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers Dist. Council Constr. Indus. Pension Fund
575 U.S. 175 (2015) Cited 461 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"
Zucco Partners, LLC v. Digimarc Corp.
552 F.3d 981 (9th Cir. 2009) Cited 1,330 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[m]ere conclusory allegations" about the resignations of company executives did not, without more, give rise to a strong inference of scienter
Loreley Financing (Jersey) No. 3 Ltd. v. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC
797 F.3d 160 (2d Cir. 2015) Cited 985 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that “breach of contract, breach of the warranty of habitability, negligence, personal injury and fraud . . . are state law claims.”
Novak v. Kasaks
216 F.3d 300 (2d Cir. 2000) Cited 1,599 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding section 78u-4(b) does not literally require pleading of all facts, so long as facts pleaded provide adequate basis for believing statements were false
ECA & Local 134 Ibew Joint Pension Trust v. Jp Morgan Chase Co.
553 F.3d 187 (2d Cir. 2009) Cited 913 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that statements that the defendant "'set the standard' for 'integrity' and that it would 'continue to reposition and strengthen [its] franchises with a focus on financial discipline'" were nonactionable puffery given their generality
Lentell v. Merrill Lynch Co., Inc.
396 F.3d 161 (2d Cir. 2005) Cited 1,003 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding that to prove loss causation, a plaintiff must allege "that the misstatement or omission concealed something from the market that, when disclosed, negatively affected the value of the security"
Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 Cited 39,098 times 320 Legal Analyses
Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity
Section 2 - Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty
15 U.S.C. § 2 Cited 4,396 times 30 Legal Analyses
In § 2 cases under the Sherman Act, as in § 7 cases under the Clayton Act (Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 325) there may be submarkets that are separate economic entities.
Section 210.4-01 - Form, order, and terminology
17 C.F.R. § 210.4-01 Cited 116 times
Incorporating GAAP into SEC disclosure requirements

Pirnik v. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V. et al

65 Cited authorities

Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

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' "

Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"

Holding that materiality may be resolved at summary judgment "if the established omissions are so obviously important to an investor that reasonable minds cannot differ on the question of materiality"

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"

Holding that "[m]ere conclusory allegations" about the resignations of company executives did not, without more, give rise to a strong inference of scienter

Holding that “breach of contract, breach of the warranty of habitability, negligence, personal injury and fraud . . . are state law claims.”

Holding section 78u-4(b) does not literally require pleading of all facts, so long as facts pleaded provide adequate basis for believing statements were false

Holding that statements that the defendant "'set the standard' for 'integrity' and that it would 'continue to reposition and strengthen [its] franchises with a focus on financial discipline'" were nonactionable puffery given their generality

Holding that to prove loss causation, a plaintiff must allege "that the misstatement or omission concealed something from the market that, when disclosed, negatively affected the value of the security"

Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

In § 2 cases under the Sherman Act, as in § 7 cases under the Clayton Act (Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 325) there may be submarkets that are separate economic entities.

Incorporating GAAP into SEC disclosure requirements