33 Cited authorities

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 276,185 times 369 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing
Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights
551 U.S. 308 (2007) Cited 9,436 times 105 Legal Analyses
Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"
Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo
544 U.S. 336 (2005) Cited 3,614 times 67 Legal Analyses
Holding that the securities statutes have a private of action “not to provide investors with broad insurance against market losses, but to protect them against those economic losses that misrepresentations actually cause”
Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano
563 U.S. 2011 (2011) Cited 1,421 times 59 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs had adequately pled a Rule 10b–5 claim—where defendant had disputed the sufficiency of the allegations with respect to the elements of scienter and materiality—by alleging that defendant had forestalled a stock price drop by making affirmative statements confirming the market's impression that defendant's leading product was safe, despite defendant's awareness of evidence suggesting a significant risk that the nasal spray led to loss of sense of smell; when the risk was finally (belatedly) disclosed, the stock price plummeted
Janus Capital Group Inc. v. First Derivative Traders
564 U.S. 135 (2011) Cited 582 times 104 Legal Analyses
Holding that a mutual fund adviser may not be found liable for a mutual fund's violation of SEC Rule 10b–5, in part because of “the narrow scope that [courts] must give the implied private right of action”
Group v. Findwhat.Com
658 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2011) Cited 733 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that “[d]efendants whose fraud prevents preexisting inflation in a stock price from dissipating are just as liable as defendants whose fraud introduces inflation into the stock price in the first instance”
Garfield v. NDC Health Corp.
466 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2006) Cited 692 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a dismissal can be final even before leave to amend expires
Financial Sec. v. Stephens, Inc.
500 F.3d 1276 (11th Cir. 2007) Cited 632 times
Holding that it is appropriate to consider a document attached to a motion to dismiss when "a plaintiff refers to a document in its complaint, the document is central to its claim, its contents are not in dispute, and the defendant attaches the document to its motion to dismiss"
Ziemba v. Cascade Intern., Inc.
256 F.3d 1194 (11th Cir. 2001) Cited 762 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that Rule 9(b) satisfied if "complaint sets forth precisely what statements were made in what documents or oral representations or what omissions were made, and the time and place of each statement and the person responsible for making it, . . . the content of such statements and the manner in which they misled plaintiffs, and what defendants obtained as a consequence of the fraud"
Mizzaro v. Home Depot
544 F.3d 1230 (11th Cir. 2008) Cited 390 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that the plaintiffs failed to allege scienter because, in part, the "amended complaint affords no basis for inferring that the individual defendants would have heard about these whistleblower complaints during the class period"
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 161,761 times 197 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 Cited 39,838 times 331 Legal Analyses
Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity
Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation
15 U.S.C. § 78u-4 Cited 7,653 times 52 Legal Analyses
Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party
Section 240.10b-5 - Employment of manipulative and deceptive devices
17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5 Cited 9,334 times 136 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any person who "make any untrue statement of material fact"

Prairie Ventures, L.L.C. v. Liotta et al

33 Cited authorities

Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

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

Holding that the securities statutes have a private of action “not to provide investors with broad insurance against market losses, but to protect them against those economic losses that misrepresentations actually cause”

Holding that a mutual fund adviser may not be found liable for a mutual fund's violation of SEC Rule 10b–5, in part because of “the narrow scope that [courts] must give the implied private right of action”

Holding that “[d]efendants whose fraud prevents preexisting inflation in a stock price from dissipating are just as liable as defendants whose fraud introduces inflation into the stock price in the first instance”

Holding that a dismissal can be final even before leave to amend expires

Holding that it is appropriate to consider a document attached to a motion to dismiss when "a plaintiff refers to a document in its complaint, the document is central to its claim, its contents are not in dispute, and the defendant attaches the document to its motion to dismiss"

Holding that the plaintiffs failed to allege scienter because, in part, the "amended complaint affords no basis for inferring that the individual defendants would have heard about these whistleblower complaints during the class period"

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party

Holding liable any person who "make any untrue statement of material fact"