Ressler v. Liz Claiborne, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding no inference of suspicion where sales took place “well over two weeks” after the complained-of comments
• timing of stock sales six months before release of negative information “does not suggest that defendants meant to realize profits immediately prior to an expected and dramatic fall in the stock’s price”
• timing of stock sales six months before release of negative information “does not suggest that defendants meant to realize profits immediately prior to an expected and dramatic fall in the stock’s price”
• timing of stock sales six months before release of negative information “does not suggest that defendants meant to realize profits immediately prior to an expected and dramatic fall in the stock’s price”
• “[L]arge proceeds alone are not suspicious per se, ... and other relevant facts may undermine any inference of fraud arising from them.”
• “Inferences of scienter can be undermined when an insider[’s] sales of stock are offset by even larger stock acquisitions during the relevant time period.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).