§Why CasetextPricing

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

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 42 MOTION to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint. . Document

65 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 252,784 times   279 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

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 266,697 times   365 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' "

  3. Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights

    551 U.S. 308 (2007)   Cited 9,121 times   104 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"

  4. TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc.

    426 U.S. 438 (1976)   Cited 2,479 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"

  5. Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers Dist. Council Constr. Indus. Pension Fund

    575 U.S. 175 (2015)   Cited 457 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"

  6. Zucco Partners, LLC v. Digimarc Corp.

    552 F.3d 981 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 1,319 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

  7. Loreley Financing (Jersey) No. 3 Ltd. v. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC

    797 F.3d 160 (2d Cir. 2015)   Cited 977 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “breach of contract, breach of the warranty of habitability, negligence, personal injury and fraud . . . are state law claims.”

  8. Novak v. Kasaks

    216 F.3d 300 (2d Cir. 2000)   Cited 1,597 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

  9. ECA & Local 134 Ibew Joint Pension Trust v. Jp Morgan Chase Co.

    553 F.3d 187 (2d Cir. 2009)   Cited 909 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

  10. Lentell v. Merrill Lynch Co., Inc.

    396 F.3d 161 (2d Cir. 2005)   Cited 998 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"

  11. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 38,931 times   316 Legal Analyses
    Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

  12. Section 2 - Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty

    15 U.S.C. § 2   Cited 4,384 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.

  13. Section 210.4-01 - Form, order, and terminology

    17 C.F.R. § 210.4-01   Cited 116 times
    Incorporating GAAP into SEC disclosure requirements