Morgan Stanley & Co. v. Coleman Holdings

How courts have described this case

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

• holding, post-Engle, that “[a]ctual dam- ages and the measure thereof are essential as a matter of law in es- tablishing a claim of fraud” (alteration in original
• reversing $1.58 billion verdict where plaintiff failed to utilize correct methods in proving measure of damages
• reversing $1.58 billion verdict where plaintiff failed to utilize correct methods in proving measure of damages
• reversing and remanding for entry of judgment where plaintiff failed to meet its burden of proof on issue where it bore that burden
• stating that federal and state law measure is identical
• “Florida law ... requires the plaintiff to prove the actual, ‘fraud-free’ value of the stock at the time of purchase.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).