33 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 270,388 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' "
  2. Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights

    551 U.S. 308 (2007)   Cited 9,245 times   105 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"
  3. Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo

    544 U.S. 336 (2005)   Cited 3,575 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”
  4. Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano

    563 U.S. 2011 (2011)   Cited 1,366 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
  5. Janus Capital Group Inc. v. First Derivative Traders

    564 U.S. 135 (2011)   Cited 570 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”
  6. Group v. Findwhat.Com

    658 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2011)   Cited 717 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”
  7. Garfield v. NDC Health Corp.

    466 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2006)   Cited 670 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a dismissal can be final even before leave to amend expires
  8. Financial Sec. v. Stephens, Inc.

    500 F.3d 1276 (11th Cir. 2007)   Cited 620 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"
  9. Ziemba v. Cascade Intern., Inc.

    256 F.3d 1194 (11th Cir. 2001)   Cited 755 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"
  10. Mizzaro v. Home Depot

    544 F.3d 1230 (11th Cir. 2008)   Cited 380 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"
  11. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 158,445 times   196 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
  12. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 39,246 times   323 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity
  13. Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation

    15 U.S.C. § 78u-4   Cited 7,531 times   51 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party
  14. Section 240.10b-5 - Employment of manipulative and deceptive devices

    17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5   Cited 9,251 times   134 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any person who "make any untrue statement of material fact"