Lirette v. Shiva Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• requiring a securities plaintiff to show that “sales by insiders were in fact unusual or suspicious in amount or timing.”
• “Even assuming ... that an analyst’s statements could be attributed to a company, any allegation that the company made misrepresentations to the analyst must survive the Rule 9(b) standard.”
• “Even assuming ... that an analyst’s statements could be attributed to a company, any allegation that the company made misrepresentations to the analyst must survive the Rule 9[b] standard.”
• A plaintiff “bears the burden of showing that sales by insiders were in fact unusual or suspicious in amount or timing.”
• inferences that defendants by virtue of their position within a company “must have known” about problems are “inadequate”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).