E.D. Pennsylvania· 10/26/2009
In Re Nutrisystem, Inc. Derivative Litigation
Citations
- 666 F. Supp. 2d 501
- 2009 WL 3443401
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- approaching question of independence under the more particularized pleadings standard of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.1
- such sales “counter any inference that the trades were made on the basis of insider knowledge.”
- such sales “counter any inference that the trades were made on the basis of insider knowledge.”
- “The Court finds that it can take judicial notice of the public filings showing that the challenged sales by [defendants] were made pursuant to 10b5–1 plans.”
- “The Court finds that it can take judicial notice of the public filings showing that the challenged sales by [defendants] were made pursuant to 10b5–1 plans”
- “The Court finds that it can take judicial notice of the public filings showing that the challenged sales by [defendants] were made pursuant to 10b5–1 plans”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: McLAUGHLIN
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
4 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Burtch v. Opus, L.L.C. (In re Opus East, L.L.C.)D. Delaware· 2012-10-12· cited 20×
- Unión De Empleados De Muelles De Puerto Rico PRSSA Welfare Plan v. UBS Financial Services Inc.First Circuit· 2013-01-04· cited 11×
- Xtreme Power Plan Trust ex rel. DeCaro v. Schindler (In re Xtreme Power Inc.)W.D. Texas· 2016-12-22· cited 8×
- In re Plug Power Inc. Stockholder Derivative LitigationCourt of Chancery of Delaware· 2025-05-02
Cites
23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd.Supreme Court· 2007-06-21· cited 6,044×
- Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. BroudoSupreme Court· 2005-04-19· cited 2,236×
- Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services, Inc.Supreme Court· 1991-05-20· cited 1,291×
- Aronson v. LewisSupreme Court of Delaware· 1984-03-01· cited 1,206×
- Ross v. BernhardSupreme Court· 1969-11-10· cited 1,046×
- Brehm v. EisnerSupreme Court of Delaware· 2000-02-09· cited 877×
- Rales v. Blasband Ex Rel. Easco Hand Tools, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware· 1993-12-23· cited 768×
- Unnamed caseThird Circuit· 2002-11-08· cited 720×
- In Re Caremark International Inc. Derivative LitigationCourt of Chancery of Delaware· 1996-09-25· cited 387×
- Unnamed caseThird Circuit· 2000-09-07· cited 370×
- Institutional Investors Group v. Avaya, Inc.Third Circuit· 2009-04-30· cited 303×
- Grobow v. PerotSupreme Court of Delaware· 1988-03-15· cited 295×
- Winer Family Trust v. QueenThird Circuit· 2007-09-24· cited 282×
- Guttman v. HuangCourt of Chancery of Delaware· 2003-05-05· cited 257×
- Wood v. BaumSupreme Court of Delaware· 2008-07-01· cited 220×
- Pogostin v. RiceSupreme Court of Delaware· 1984-06-21· cited 195×
- Beam Ex Rel. Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc. v. StewartCourt of Chancery of Delaware· 2003-09-30· cited 89×
- In Re the Walt Disney Co. Derivative LitigationCourt of Chancery of Delaware· 1998-10-07· cited 76×
- In Re Oracle Corp.Court of Chancery of Delaware· 2004-12-02· cited 61×
- In RE ORACLE CORP. DERIVATIVE LITIGATION v. Oracle Corp.Supreme Court of Delaware· 2005-04-14· cited 36×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.