Instituto De Prevision Militar v. Merrill Lynch

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that arguments not made to appellate court are abandoned
• holding that arguments not made to appellate court are abandoned
• finding that, where the defendant accepted investors’ monies for investment in securities, no actual purchase or sale need occur to qualify as a “covered security” under SLUSA
• finding that an individual action proceeded as a single action with related lawsuits
• setting forth the four elements of the \group of lawsuits\ provision
• The “coincide” requirement is met if “a fraudulent scheme . . . coincided and depended upon the purchase or sale of [covered] securities.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).