Goldstein v. MCI Worldcom

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that compensation package was probative where MCI World-Com CEO Bernard Ebbers had a unique pay package and stood to lose millions if WorldCom’s stock price dropped significantly
• concluding that the allegation that defendant was a “hands-on” CEO and therefore must have been aware of accounting error was not specific enough to support an inference of scienter
• holding that even pleading gross mismanagement of those overseeing an organization who “should have known” of potential fraud was insufficient to survive a motion to dismiss
• holding that plaintiffs must particularize intent allegations raising strong inference of scienter
• holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion where “the plaintiffs did not demonstrate to the court how they would . . . cure the pleading defects raised by the defendants”
• holding that the district court properly exercised its discretion in denying leave to amend because plaintiffs “did not suggest in their responsive pleading any additional facts not initially pled that could, if necessary, cure the pleading defects”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).