VIEW TREE
ICON KEY
766:false:false:false:false:false:false:true:false:false:!199708!199765!:false:-1:-1
Primary liability under Rule 10b-5 for particular types of wrongs
Add Comment
Contributed in 2008 & last edited in 2008 by David Gold
Browse from Weight and sufficiency of evidence
Law
»
Commerce, labor, particular activities & industries
»
Securities
»
Liability & enforcement
»
Fraud claims
»
SEC Rule 10b-5
»
Substance
»
Liability
»
Primary
»
Types of claims (by types of wrongs): Primary liability under...
Narrow Down
Contribution Suggestions
vouch for authority for rule...
In order to satisfy the the requirement of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 that plaintiffs pleading a Rule 10b-5 violation to...Cornelia I. Crowell GST Trust v. Possis Medical, Inc., 519 F.3d 778, 782 (8th Cir. 2008).
in support of
In order to satisfy the the requirement of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 that plaintiffs pleading a Rule 10b-5 violation to state with particularity the facts constituting the alleged misstatement or omission, the plaintiff need not elaborate on every evidentiary detail.vouch for authority for rule...
Because in Rule 10b-5 claims based on an assertion that the speaker's opinion was subjectively false the elements of misstatement and scienter...In re Credit Suisse First Boston Corp., 431 F.3d 36, 48 (1st Cir. 2005).
in support of
Because in Rule 10b-5 claims based on an assertion that the speaker's opinion was subjectively false the elements of misstatement and scienter merge, authorities addressing scienter are instructive.vouch for authority for rule...
In order to qualify as "strong" within the meaning of section 21D(b)(2) of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, an inference of...Ezra Charitable Trust v. Tyco International, 466 F.3d 1, 6 (1st Cir. 2006) (affirming dismissal for failure to plead scienter, applying rule that "[s]cienter allegations do not pass the `strong inference' test when, viewed in light of the complaint as a whole, there are legitimate explanations for the...
in support of
In order to qualify as "strong" within the meaning of section 21D(b)(2) of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, an inference of scienter must be more convincing than alternative inferences of nonfraudulent intent.