Plumbers & Pipefitters Local Union 719 Pension Fund v. Zimmer Holdings, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• reflecting, for example, that in 2016, both Patsley and Holmes sold shares on February 12th, 24th, and 25th, and in 2017, both sold shares on February 23rd, 24th, and 25th
• “Oral exchanges are less precise than written ones. [The CEO] did not know what question was coming, had to answer off the cuff, and did not have an opportunity to review the question and edit his answer before the next question was posed.”
• “Plaintiffs contend that we should infer scienter because [the CEO] and other top managers had an incentive to make Zimmer look good in order to keep their jobs, improve their bonuses, and increase the value of their stock options. This is too generic to satisfy Tellabs.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).