In Re Livent, Inc. Securities Litigation

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “the speed with which the fraud was discovered after the Lynx investment and the change in corporate leadership [was] deceptive:” the fraud was not unearthed during due diligence, and “the alleged orchestrators of the fraud ... had been removed from their managerial positions”
• finding that scienter was not adequately pled, in part, because “the Complaint does not allege that the Outside Directors ever saw the agreements memorializing those transactions or were aware of their existence”
• finding it unreasonable to infer scienter on the part of outside auditors despite failure to detect large scale fraud in performing auditing duties
• noting that the parties had submitted “the affidavits of several experts, including a leading member of the Ontario bar well-versed in securities litigation, a former Justice of the Canadian Supreme Court, and three professors of law at the University of Toronto”
• \The presumption on factual inferences does not apply to a forum non conveniens motion.\
• “The presumption on factual inferences does not apply to a forum non conveniens motion.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).