Morales v. Gould Investors Trust

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendants’ positions as insiders established that they had access to inside information, which was sufficient to constitute evidence of speculative abuse
• providing examples of courts “liberal interpretation as to what can be a ‘purchase’ or ‘sale’ ”
• court held that transaction was so “unique” that it was unorthodox yet nevertheless also held that the insider was liable under section 16(b)
• “the manifest ability of the defendants to dictate the timing of the transfers in question... bodes towards a potential for speculative abuse”
• “It is quite clear that the rule in this Circuit is to give a broad construction to the term ‘profits realized.’ ”
• discussing breadth of coverage of Section 16(b)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).