Delogny v. Nash

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the following statements were corporate puffery: “we’re 4 highly optimistic . . . about our growth,” “[d]emand remained as strong as ever,” “Q2 was an 5 amazing quarter,” and “I’m very happy with our continued ability to scale and [unbelievably] 6 strong sales”
• finding that the following statements were corporate puffery: “we’re 4 highly optimistic . . . about our growth,” “[d]emand remained as strong as ever,” “Q2 was an 5 amazing quarter,” and “I’m very happy with our continued ability to scale and [unbelievably] 6 strong sales”
• warning language was meaningful 9 where it “specifically refers to a potential lack of demand and the potential that signed contracts 10 would be cancelled, the two risk factors that Plaintiffs allege that Defendants failed to disclose”
• warning language was meaningful 9 where it “specifically refers to a potential lack of demand and the potential that signed contracts 10 would be cancelled, the two risk factors that Plaintiffs allege that Defendants failed to disclose”
• collecting numerous cases in support of the proposition that “merely acting as the ‘source’ of allegedly false or misleading information does not mean that such a person had ‘ultimate authority’ over the statements that were then communicated to the public”
• collecting cases applying Janus to corporate officers

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).