Bemiss v. Dwight

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding, in the context of a Form 10-Q, that “[c]ourts have held that the issuance of a restatement sufficiently pleads materiality because under GAAP, a restatement issues only when errors are material”
• distinguishing Lions Gate because a “federal civil complaint . . . was actually pending” against the entity, as opposed to the “mere existence of an open investigation,” which would not have triggered ASC 450
• “Before reaching the elements of an unjust enrichment claim, 20 a court must satisfy itself that no contract already governs the relevant relationship between 21 the parties.”
• “[m]any courts have concluded that an allegation that the company’s stock was publicly traded is sufficient to plead this element under Section 17(a)(2)” (citing Mudd, 885 F. Supp. 2d at 670; SEC v. Farmer, No. 14 Civ. 2345 (KPE), 2015 WL 5838867, at (S.D. Tex. Oct. 7, 2015

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).