Potter v. Wallace

How courts have described this case

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

• acknowledging that if “the strategies employed by [Credit Suisse] can appropriately be characterized as ‘hedging,’ then [Credit Suisse’s] ‘scheme’ entailed little misrepresentation”
• recognizing the requirement of alleging “reliance on an assumption of an efficient market free of manipulation” for market manipulation claims
• finding that a complaint had sufficiently alleged motive where the alleged fraud allowed' the defendants to “improve their ability to access a specific and extremely profitable market, potentially worth billions of dollars.”
• noting defendants' incentive to strengthen relationships with hedge funds, whose business was much more lucrative than other investors, evidenced motive
• granting defendants’ request for judicial notice where plaintiff failed to contest the authenticity of defendants’ proffered public documents or object to the court’s consideration of them
• taking judicial notice of public SEC filings discussed in the complaint

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).