R. Richard Bastian, III v. Petren Resources Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that if ventures failed because of industry-wide phenomena, rather than purported fraud, plaintiff could not demonstrate loss causation
• calling loss causation simply “an exotic name” for “the standard common law fraud rule” requiring the plaintiff to prove both factual and legal causation
• loss causation not established because defendants’ misstatements were not the reason that the transaction “turned out to be a losing one.”
• “in actions under section 11 of the 1933 Act ... absence of loss causation is an explicit defense”
• loss causation is “more accurately described as an element of cause, period.”
• \[Cjases should be decided on the narrowest possible ground.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).