In re Computer Sciences Corp. Securities Litigation

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting the argument that plaintiffs had failed to establish market efficiency because they had not submitted an event study
• rejecting the argument that plaintiffs had failed to establish market efficiency because they had not submitted an event study
• rejecting the argument that plaintiffs had failed to establish market efficiency because they had not submitted an event study
• \Fourth Circuit precedent does not require that the efficiency of the market be proved using an event study to show a cause and effect relationship between company announcements and changes in the company's stock price.\
• “[T]his theory [that each news event would result in a change in price] is not in keeping with the key principle underlying the efficient market theory, namely that in an efficient market material, unexpected information will be timely reflected in the stock price.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Carpenters Pension Trust Fund v. Barclays PLC
  S.D. New York· 2015-08-20· cited 41×
• In re Diamond Foods, Inc., Securities Litigation
  N.D. California· 2013-05-06· cited 21×
• City of Cape Coral Mun. Firefighters' Ret. Plan v. Emergent Biosolutions, Inc.
  D. Maryland· 2018-06-08· cited 17×
• Strougo v. Barclays PLC
  S.D. New York· 2016-02-02· cited 17×
• Plumbers & Pipefitters, National Pension Fund v. Burns
  N.D. Ohio· 2013-09-04· cited 3×

Cites

29 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 1993-06-28· cited 21,376×
• Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor
  Supreme Court· 1997-06-25· cited 4,991×
• Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes
  Supreme Court· 2011-06-20· cited 4,653×
• Basic Inc. v. Levinson
  Supreme Court· 1988-03-07· cited 3,007×
• Califano v. Yamasaki
  Supreme Court· 1979-06-20· cited 1,888×
• Blackie v. Barrack
  Ninth Circuit· 1975-09-25· cited 871×
• Robinson v. Metro-North Commuter R.R. Co.
  Second Circuit· 2001-10-09· cited 312×
• Gariety v. Grant Thornton, LLP
  Fourth Circuit· 2004-05-12· cited 207×
• Beck v. Maximus, Inc.
  Third Circuit· 2006-08-04· cited 201×
• Cammer v. Bloom
  D. New Jersey· 1989-04-19· cited 199×
• James v. City of Dallas
  Fifth Circuit· 2001-07-17· cited 136×
• Longman v. Food Lion, Inc.
  Fourth Circuit· 1999-10-07· cited 108×
• In Re Seagate Technology II Securities Litigation
  N.D. California· 1994-03-02· cited 63×
• Connecticut Retirement Plans & Trust Funds v. Amgen Inc.
  Ninth Circuit· 2011-11-08· cited 45×
• Rolex Employees Retirement Trust v. Mentor Graphics Corp.
  D. Oregon· 1991-05-23· cited 34×
• In re Alstom Sa Securities Litigation
  S.D. New York· 2008-08-26· cited 33×
• Rocco v. Nam Tai Electronics, Inc.
  S.D. New York· 2007-08-21· cited 31×
• Shiring v. Tier Technologies, Inc.
  E.D. Virginia· 2007-07-23· cited 28×
• In re Tyco International, Ltd. Multidistrict Litigation (MDL 1335)
  D. New Hampshire· 2006-06-12· cited 22×
• In re Safeguard Scientifics
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 2003-08-26· cited 20×