67 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 237,052 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
477 U.S. 317 (1986) Cited 217,036 times 40 Legal Analyses
Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"
Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio
475 U.S. 574 (1986) Cited 113,493 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them
Basic Inc. v. Levinson
485 U.S. 224 (1988) Cited 3,355 times 308 Legal Analyses
Holding that the District Court appropriately certified the class based on the presumption of reliance
Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore
439 U.S. 322 (1979) Cited 4,248 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that district courts have discretion to refuse to apply offensive non-mutual collateral estoppel against a defendant if such an application of the doctrine would be unfair
Ernst Ernst v. Hochfelder
425 U.S. 185 (1976) Cited 3,488 times 39 Legal Analyses
Holding that Section 9(f) “contains a state-of-mind condition requiring something more than negligence”
Taylor v. List
880 F.2d 1040 (9th Cir. 1989) Cited 9,073 times
Holding that no § 1983 liability exists absent personal participation
TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc.
426 U.S. 438 (1976) Cited 2,484 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"
Merrill v. Dabit
547 U.S. 71 (2006) Cited 671 times 43 Legal Analyses
Holding that state law class action securities fraud claims brought by “holders” of securities are, just like those of “purchasers” and “sellers,” preempted by the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act
Herman MacLean v. Huddleston
459 U.S. 375 (1983) Cited 1,312 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that an express remedy under § 11 of the 1933 Act for misleading registration statements did not preclude an overlapping implied private cause of action for fraudulent misrepresentation under § 10(b) of the 1934 Act
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 329,940 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Rule 65 - Injunctions and Restraining Orders
Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 Cited 22,575 times 87 Legal Analyses
Recognizing court's ability to enter emergency order with less than full adversary hearing and even, in appropriate circumstances, without notice
Section 78j - Manipulative and deceptive devices
15 U.S.C. § 78j Cited 12,534 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 77q - Fraudulent interstate transactions
15 U.S.C. § 77q Cited 3,314 times 38 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting the use of "any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud" in connection with the offer or sale of any security
Section 78u - Investigations and actions
15 U.S.C. § 78u Cited 2,275 times 85 Legal Analyses
Granting the SEC the power to seek civil penalties for violations of the Exchange Act
Section 6621 - Determination of rate of interest
26 U.S.C. § 6621 Cited 1,837 times 22 Legal Analyses
Applying a higher interest rate to past liabilities resulting from tax-motivated transactions
Section 78c - Definitions and application
15 U.S.C. § 78c Cited 1,671 times 88 Legal Analyses
Exempting certain "note" with maturities of less than nine months from the definition of "security" under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Section 77t - Injunctions and prosecution of offenses
15 U.S.C. § 77t Cited 1,416 times 13 Legal Analyses
Granting the SEC the power to seek civil penalties for violations of the Securities Act
Section 77b - Definitions; promotion of efficiency, competition, and capital formation
15 U.S.C. § 77b Cited 1,407 times 27 Legal Analyses
Instructing the SEC to consider, "in addition to the protection of investors, whether the action will promote efficiency, competition, and capital formation"
Section 240.10b-5 - Employment of manipulative and deceptive devices
17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5 Cited 9,224 times 134 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any person who "make any untrue statement of material fact"

Securities And Exchange Commission v. Bruce A Cole et al

67 Cited authorities

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them

Holding that the District Court appropriately certified the class based on the presumption of reliance

Holding that district courts have discretion to refuse to apply offensive non-mutual collateral estoppel against a defendant if such an application of the doctrine would be unfair

Holding that Section 9(f) “contains a state-of-mind condition requiring something more than negligence”

Holding that no § 1983 liability exists absent personal participation

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"

Holding that state law class action securities fraud claims brought by “holders” of securities are, just like those of “purchasers” and “sellers,” preempted by the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act

Holding that an express remedy under § 11 of the 1933 Act for misleading registration statements did not preclude an overlapping implied private cause of action for fraudulent misrepresentation under § 10(b) of the 1934 Act

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Recognizing court's ability to enter emergency order with less than full adversary hearing and even, in appropriate circumstances, without notice

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

Prohibiting the use of "any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud" in connection with the offer or sale of any security

Granting the SEC the power to seek civil penalties for violations of the Exchange Act

Applying a higher interest rate to past liabilities resulting from tax-motivated transactions

Exempting certain "note" with maturities of less than nine months from the definition of "security" under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Granting the SEC the power to seek civil penalties for violations of the Securities Act

Instructing the SEC to consider, "in addition to the protection of investors, whether the action will promote efficiency, competition, and capital formation"

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