James D. Massey and Dennis E. Murray, Sr. v. Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding harm to a corporation that injures a shareholder only through a diminution in share price cannot amount to a “distinct and separate injury” because all shareholders are essentially harmed in the same manner
• “allowing direct recovery when the action is properly a derivative one fails to protect corporate creditors because the proceeds avoid the legal ordering of creditors and investors”
• “[A]llowing a derivative action to proceed as a direct one allows for the possibility of multitudinous litigation brought by shareholders and the corporation, with the corresponding risk of double-counting (and double-punishment).”
• discussing policies supporting “a firm distinction between direct and derivative actions”
• “[W]here an exhibit [attached to a complaint] conflicts with the allegations of the complaint, the exhibit typically controls.”
• a party may plead itself out of court by alleging facts that establish an impenetrable defense to its claims

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).