Leventhal v. Tow

How courts have described this case

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

• holding insider trading motive did not raise requisite inference of scienter where two of five defendants did not sell their personal stock during class period
• plaintiff's allegations that defendants had a motive to artificially inflate stock price to get more favorable terms in stock-for-stock transactions and debentures are too generalized to establish scienter
• allegations that \defendants artificially inflated\ stock price \to protect and enhance their executive positions and negotiate as favorable a deal as possible in a pending employment contract also fail to give rise to a strong inference of scienter\
• “[T]he allegation that the defendants artificially inflated Citizens’ stock price in order to protect and enhance their executive positions . . . also fail[s] to give rise to a strong inference of scienter. This motive has been rejected routinely”
• \This motive has been rejected routinely.\
• “This motive has been rejected routinely.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).