§Why CasetextPricing

Taksir et al v. The Vanguard Group

First MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

28 Cited authorities

  1. In re Burlington Coat Factory

    114 F.3d 1410 (3d Cir. 1997)   Cited 7,642 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court may consider a "document integral to or explicitly relied upon in the complaint" when deciding a motion to dismiss

  2. Merrill v. Dabit

    547 U.S. 71 (2006)   Cited 668 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

  3. Pinker v. Roche Holdings Ltd.

    292 F.3d 361 (3d Cir. 2002)   Cited 2,317 times
    Holding that in ruling on a Rule 12(b) motion we must accept all of the plaintiff's allegations as true and construct disputed facts in favor of the plaintiff.

  4. Belmont v. MB Investment Partners, Inc.

    708 F.3d 470 (3d Cir. 2013)   Cited 508 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "an adviser may benefit from a transaction recommended to a client if, and only if, that benefit and all related details of the transaction are fully disclosed"

  5. Chadbourne & Parke LLP v. Troice

    571 U.S. 377 (2014)   Cited 153 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Holding that SLUSA’s "in connection with" prong extends to "misrepresentations that are material to the purchase or sale of a covered security"

  6. Hunt v. U.S. Tobacco Co.

    538 F.3d 217 (3d Cir. 2008)   Cited 322 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that private plaintiffs pursuing claims under "all substantive sections of the Consumer Protection Law, fraud-based or not," must prove justifiable reliance

  7. Lander v. Hartford Life Annuity Ins. Co.

    251 F.3d 101 (2d Cir. 2001)   Cited 169 times
    Holding that variable annuity contracts constituted "covered securities" as defined by the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998

  8. Rowinski v. Salomon Smith Barney Inc.

    398 F.3d 294 (3d Cir. 2005)   Cited 141 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that SLUSA precluded certain claims under Pennsylvania law for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and deceptive consumer practices

  9. Behlen v. Merrill Lynch

    311 F.3d 1087 (11th Cir. 2002)   Cited 116 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding district court did not lose federal subject matter jurisdiction when plaintiff amended complaint post-removal to drop federal claim

  10. In re Nokia Oyj (Nokia Corp.)

    423 F. Supp. 2d 364 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)   Cited 84 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that optimistic statements about growth were puffery

  11. Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation

    15 U.S.C. § 78u-4   Cited 7,460 times   48 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party

  12. Section 78bb - Effect on existing law

    15 U.S.C. § 78bb   Cited 906 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Adopting definition of "covered security" found in paragraphs and of section 18(b) of the Securities Act of 1933

  13. Section 77r - Exemption from State regulation of securities offerings

    15 U.S.C. § 77r   Cited 201 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing state authority to regulate offerings of securities that are completely intra-state