21 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 235,819 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 215,979 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"
Basic Inc. v. Levinson
485 U.S. 224 (1988) Cited 3,342 times 307 Legal Analyses
Holding that the District Court appropriately certified the class based on the presumption of reliance
TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc.
426 U.S. 438 (1976) Cited 2,477 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"
Aaron v. Securities & Exchange Commission
446 U.S. 680 (1980) Cited 777 times 27 Legal Analyses
Holding that scienter is an element of Section 10(b), Rule 10b-5, and Section 17, but not Section 17 or
Bryant v. Avado Brands, Inc.
187 F.3d 1271 (11th Cir. 1999) Cited 1,277 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that “a court, when considering a motion to dismiss in a securities fraud case, may take judicial notice . . . of relevant public documents required to be filed with the SEC”
Garfield v. NDC Health Corp.
466 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2006) Cited 654 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a dismissal can be final even before leave to amend expires
Mizzaro v. Home Depot
544 F.3d 1230 (11th Cir. 2008) Cited 375 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"
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Calvo
378 F.3d 1211 (11th Cir. 2004) Cited 181 times 1 Legal Analyses
Concluding that a limitations defense did not apply to the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) when it is sued to enforce securities laws, thus "vindicating public rights and furthering public interests"
S.E.C. v. Merchant
483 F.3d 747 (11th Cir. 2007) Cited 127 times
Holding that provisions requiring unanimous, for-cause removal made manager "effectively unremovable"
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 328,160 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 230.405 - [Effective 7/1/2024] Definitions of terms
17 C.F.R. § 230.405 Cited 351 times 12 Legal Analyses
Defining control the same way
Section 230.501 - Definitions and terms used in Regulation D
17 C.F.R. § 230.501 Cited 153 times 20 Legal Analyses
Defining "accredited investor" to include persons "who the issuer reasonably believes" are accredited
Section 230.506 - Exemption for limited offers and sales without regard to dollar amount of offering
17 C.F.R. § 230.506 Cited 106 times 10 Legal Analyses
Providing specific rules under which an issuer can ensure a transaction is not a public offering

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Levin et al

21 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 the District Court appropriately certified the class based on the presumption of reliance

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 scienter is an element of Section 10(b), Rule 10b-5, and Section 17, but not Section 17 or

Holding that “a court, when considering a motion to dismiss in a securities fraud case, may take judicial notice . . . of relevant public documents required to be filed with the SEC”

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

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"

Concluding that a limitations defense did not apply to the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) when it is sued to enforce securities laws, thus "vindicating public rights and furthering public interests"

Holding that provisions requiring unanimous, for-cause removal made manager "effectively unremovable"

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

Defining control the same way

Defining "accredited investor" to include persons "who the issuer reasonably believes" are accredited

Providing specific rules under which an issuer can ensure a transaction is not a public offering