23 Cited authorities

  1. Christensen v. Harris County

    529 U.S. 576 (2000)   Cited 1,788 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that agency interpretations contained in "policy statements, agency manuals, and enforcement guidelines, all of which lack the force of law do not warrant Chevron-style deference"
  2. ATSI Communications, Inc. v. Shaar Fund, Ltd.

    493 F.3d 87 (2d Cir. 2007)   Cited 3,257 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that deception occurs when "investors are misled to believe that prices at which they purchase and sell securities are determined by the natural interplay of supply and demand, not rigged by manipulators"
  3. Gustafson v. Alloyd Co.

    513 U.S. 561 (1995)   Cited 911 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that § 12 does not apply to secondary market transactions as the statute's inclusion of the term “prospectus” evinces an intent to limit the Sections's scope solely to the initial public offering
  4. Affiliated Ute Citizens v. United States

    406 U.S. 128 (1972)   Cited 1,559 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Holding bank jointly and severally liable with its employees, without explanation
  5. Pinter v. Dahl

    486 U.S. 622 (1988)   Cited 771 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that only a statutory "seller" may be liable under § 12 of Securities Act
  6. Berckeley Inv. Group, Ltd. v. Colkitt

    455 F.3d 195 (3d Cir. 2006)   Cited 916 times
    Holding that an expert witness is prohibited from rendering a legal opinion because it would usurp the District Court's pivotal role in explaining the law to the jury
  7. Lentell v. Merrill Lynch Co., Inc.

    396 F.3d 161 (2d Cir. 2005)   Cited 895 times   10 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"
  8. S.E. C. v. Capital Gains Bureau

    375 U.S. 180 (1963)   Cited 604 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an investment adviser who purchases a security for his own account and then recommends the same security to his client without disclosing that ownership violates the antifraud provision of the Act and breaches his fiduciary duty
  9. In re Morgan Stanley Infor

    592 F.3d 347 (2d Cir. 2010)   Cited 306 times
    Affirming the district court's dismissal of a Section 15 claim where the plaintiffs' Section 11 and 12 claims were properly dismissed
  10. S.E. C. v. Ralston Purina Co.

    346 U.S. 119 (1953)   Cited 403 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Finding the "imposition of the burden of proof on an issuer who would plead the [private placement] exemption" to be "fair and reasonable" given the "broadly remedial purposes of federal securities regulation"
  11. Section 77k - Civil liabilities on account of false registration statement

    15 U.S.C. § 77k   Cited 1,936 times   64 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
  12. Section 77l - Civil liabilities arising in connection with prospectuses and communications

    15 U.S.C. § 77l   Cited 700 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing relief if the offering documents contain just one untrue statement of material fact
  13. Section 771 - Comptroller General, powers and duties

    15 U.S.C. § 771   Cited 640 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Allowing private cause of action for violations of § 77e