21 Cited authorities

Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor
521 U.S. 591 (1997) Cited 6,955 times 69 Legal Analyses
Holding that courts are "bound to enforce" Rule 23's certification requirements, even where it means decertifying a class after they had reached a settlement agreement and submitted it to the court for approval
Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo
544 U.S. 336 (2005) Cited 3,550 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”
Eisen v. Carlisle Jacquelin
417 U.S. 156 (1974) Cited 3,763 times 22 Legal Analyses
Holding that individual notice to class members identifiable through reasonable efforts is mandatory in (b) actions
Mullane v. Central Hanover Tr. Co.
339 U.S. 306 (1950) Cited 10,309 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that due process requires a hearing "appropriate to the nature of the case"
Consol. Rail Corp. v. Town of Hyde Park
47 F.3d 473 (2d Cir. 1995) Cited 745 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "numerosity is presumed at a level of 40 members"
Smilow v. Sw. Bell Mobile Sys. Inc.
323 F.3d 32 (1st Cir. 2003) Cited 372 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding common issues of law and fact predominate where "case turns on interpretation of form contract, executed by all class members and defendant"
Gary Plastic Packaging v. Merrill Lynch
903 F.2d 176 (2d Cir. 1990) Cited 389 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that an interlocutory order denying a motion for class certification merges into a final judgment resulting from the class representative's failure to prosecute its individual claims
Acticon AG v. China North East Petroleum Holdings Ltd.
692 F.3d 34 (2d Cir. 2012) Cited 77 times 2 Legal Analyses
Concluding that price recovery after the class period “does not negate the inference that [plaintiff] has suffered economic loss” because the price rebound could be explained by external events
Flinn v. FMC Corp.
528 F.2d 1169 (4th Cir. 1975) Cited 201 times
Finding class action settlement reasonable where “[o]nly five members of the class filed any dissent from the settlement”
Lawrence Fogarazzo and Carolyn Fogarazzo, Joint Tenants with Rights of Survivorship, Stephen L. Hopkins, and Don Engel on behalf of themselves, and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Lehman Brothers, Inc., Goldman Sachs & Co., and Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc., Defendants.
232 F.R.D. 176 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) Cited 65 times
Holding that an event window ending on the day after the release of the information was appropriate
Rule 23 - Class Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Cited 34,939 times 1235 Legal Analyses
Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"
Section 1391 - Venue generally
28 U.S.C. § 1391 Cited 27,824 times 197 Legal Analyses
Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred
Section 78j - Manipulative and deceptive devices
15 U.S.C. § 78j Cited 12,506 times 165 Legal Analyses
Granting SEC power to establish rules to further statute forbidding manipulative or deceptive devices in connection with purchase or sale of securities
Section 78t - Liability of controlling persons and persons who aid and abet violations
15 U.S.C. § 78t Cited 3,983 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any person "who, directly or indirectly, controls any person liable under any provision of this chapter or of any rule or regulation thereunder"
Section 240.10b-5 - Employment of manipulative and deceptive devices
17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5 Cited 9,199 times 133 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any person who "make any untrue statement of material fact"

Rosado v. China North East Petroleum Holdings Limited et al

21 Cited authorities

Holding that courts are "bound to enforce" Rule 23's certification requirements, even where it means decertifying a class after they had reached a settlement agreement and submitted it to the court for approval

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 individual notice to class members identifiable through reasonable efforts is mandatory in (b) actions

Holding that due process requires a hearing "appropriate to the nature of the case"

Holding that "numerosity is presumed at a level of 40 members"

Holding common issues of law and fact predominate where "case turns on interpretation of form contract, executed by all class members and defendant"

Holding that an interlocutory order denying a motion for class certification merges into a final judgment resulting from the class representative's failure to prosecute its individual claims

Concluding that price recovery after the class period “does not negate the inference that [plaintiff] has suffered economic loss” because the price rebound could be explained by external events

Finding class action settlement reasonable where “[o]nly five members of the class filed any dissent from the settlement”

Holding that an event window ending on the day after the release of the information was appropriate

Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"

Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred

Granting SEC power to establish rules to further statute forbidding manipulative or deceptive devices in connection with purchase or sale of securities

Holding liable any person "who, directly or indirectly, controls any person liable under any provision of this chapter or of any rule or regulation thereunder"

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