Diehl, C. v. Phila. Co. Clerk Jud. Records

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that “reliance ... is an essential element of the [scheme liability] private cause of action”
• holding that loss causation — proof that the defendant’s deceptive conduct caused their claimed economic loss — need not be shown to obtain class certification
• holding that the fraud-on-the-market presumption did not apply because business partners’ “deceptive acts were not communicated to the public” (emphasis added)
• concluding that the implied right of action under § 10(b) could not be used by investors to hold certain entities liable “because the investors did not rely upon [the entities’] statements or representations”
• finding that defendants had no duty to disclose and thus were not liable to customers of a collaborating co-defendant for misstatements
• noting that “[cjonduct itself can be deceptive,” and liability under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 does not require “a specific oral or written statement”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).