In re Winstar Communications 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 the ascertainability requirement was “easily met in the context of securities litigation where the list of shareholders is readily obtainable”
• concluding that an alleged misstatement in a Form 10-K’s unqualified audit letter “implicate[d] the same set of concerns for all investors in [the defendant’s] securities, including stocks and bonds, because of their common concern for the company’s financial health”
• finding that six large banks acting as market makers was sufficient evidence of market efficiency
• finding that two out of five days in an informal analysis of price reactions to news events was sufficient
• finding that “at least three analysts” reporting on the company’s bonds and “numerous analysts” following the company’s stock during the class period weighed in favor of market efficiency
• finding that where the “total par value of all three Winstar bonds was $1.88 billion,” “[t]he sufficiently large issue size [was] consistent with a more liquid and efficient market”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Carpenters Pension Trust Fund v. Barclays PLC
  S.D. New York· 2015-08-20· cited 41×
• McIntire v. China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc.
  S.D. New York· 2014-08-15· cited 35×
• In re Eletrobras Securities Litigation
  S.D. New York· 2017-03-27· cited 20×
• OFI Risk Arbitrages v. Cooper Tire & Rubber Co.
  D. Delaware· 2014-08-06· cited 18×
• Strougo v. Barclays PLC
  S.D. New York· 2016-02-02· cited 17×
• Bennett v. Sprint Nextel Corp.
  D. Kansas· 2014-03-27· cited 12×
• In re NII Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation
  E.D. Virginia· 2015-11-17· cited 11×
• Wilbush v. Ambac Financial Group, Inc.
  S.D. New York· 2017-09-05· cited 7×
• Soto v. Hensler
  D. Delaware· 2017-02-14· cited 4×
• Levitt ex rel. Levitt v. J.P. Morgan Securities Inc.
  E.D. New York· 2014-03-24· cited 2×

Cites

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

• Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife
  Supreme Court· 1992-06-12· cited 24,791×
• 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×
• Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores
  Supreme Court· 1975-10-06· cited 2,261×
• Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds
  Supreme Court· 2013-02-27· cited 1,424×
• Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracusano
  Supreme Court· 2011-03-22· cited 1,056×
• Myers v. Hertz Corp.
  Second Circuit· 2010-10-27· cited 803×
• Unnamed case
  Second Circuit· 2001-10-17· cited 451×
• Erica P. John Fund, Inc. v. Halliburton Co.
  Supreme Court· 2011-06-06· cited 440×
• Robidoux v. Celani
  Second Circuit· 1993-03-10· cited 379×
• In Re Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation.
  First Circuit· 2006-12-05· cited 315×
• Teamsters Local 445 Freight Division Pension Fund v. Bombardier Inc.
  Second Circuit· 2008-10-14· cited 312×
• W.R. Huff Asset Management Co. v. Deloitte & Touche LLP
  Second Circuit· 2008-12-03· cited 312×
• Marisol A. ex rel. Forbes v. Giuliani
  Second Circuit· 1997-09-26· cited 306×
• McLaughlin v. American Tobacco Co.
  Second Circuit· 2008-04-03· cited 224×
• Cammer v. Bloom
  D. New Jersey· 1989-04-19· cited 199×
• In Re Flag Telecom Holdings Securities Litigation
  Second Circuit· 2009-07-22· cited 198×
• NECA-IBEW Health & Welfare Fund v. Goldman Sachs & Co.
  Second Circuit· 2012-09-06· cited 183×
• Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Town of Hyde Park
  Second Circuit· 1995-01-31· cited 161×