Howard Wool v. Tandem Computers Incorporated, Robert C. Marshall, Henry v. Morgan, and James G. Treybig

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiffs may plead on information and belief if matters are not within their personal knowledge
• finding control where directors were involved in day-to-day activities and had direct involvement with alleged false statements
• assuming that the group pleading doctrine survived the PSLRA
• noting growing trend requires plaintiffs to plead only the circumstances establishing control
• “the increment of artificial inflation caused by misrepresentations may fluctuate ‘as a result of market forces operating on the misrepresentations,’ ” quoting Green, 541 F.2d at 1345
• “a plaintiff fulfills the particularity requirement of Rule 9(b) by pleading the misrepresentations with particularity and where possible the roles of the individual defendants in the misrepresentations”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).