In Re HomeBanc 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.

• concluding that “after-the-fact events” do not support an inference of scienter
• taking “judicial notice of the existence of the financial crisis,” but “not that the crisis caused the decline in HomeBanc’s stock price” (emphasis added)
• “Although these disclosures may not immunize every statement that Plaintiff alleges to be false or misleading, they do as a whole erode the essential allegations of Plaintiffs complaint.”
• \The fact that Defendants did not take advantage of the purportedly inflated price to sell their holdings overwhelms the inference that they were knowingly withholding from the public damaging and material information about HomeBanc.\
• “Plaintiffs reliance upon after-the-fact events (i.e., HomeBanc’s ultimate demise) to support an inference that these and other earlier statements. must have been intentionally misleading. and made with scienter amounts to little more than fraud by hindsight, which is not actionable.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).