McDaniel v. Guthrie

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the Court “need not conclusively decide this question” as under either standard the claims at issue would be barred
• finding plausible an explanation that the defendants were in “a constant game of ‘Catch up’”, which supported an inference of mismanagement but not fraud
• “The fact that defendants recognized problems, announced that they were implementing effective controls and procedures, and then recognized more problems does not indicate that their statements were false at the time that they were made.”
• “We have never considered whether Merck abrogates this circuit’s existing ‘inquiry notice’ rule in favor of the discovery rule in Securities Act claims, an issue that divides the district courts in this circuit.”
• treating relation back and equitable tolling doctrines as distinct

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).