Project 74 Allentown, Inc. v. Frost

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a stock was not traded in an efficient market, in part because the stock was never eligible to file an S-3 form
• stating that “[m]ajor corporations are closely followed by hundreds of securities analysts throughout the country”
• noting that the economic literature has criticized reliance on the number of market makers as an indicator of efficiency
• finding that price fluctuations in price of stock not indicative of efficient market, only that price history “appears to have been random and volatile.”
• observing that “[i]n this regard, the adequacy prong of Rule 23 overlaps with considerations of typicality”
• stating that “it is impossible to accord much significance to the number of market makers, until one knows the volume of shares that they committed to trade, the volume of shares they actually traded, and the prices at which they did so”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).