Serabian v. Amoskeag Bank Shares, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that, while not all of the plaintiffs' allegations of securities fraud were actionable, the fact that some were actionable precluded dismissal of the complaint but otherwise left discretion in the district court as to how to winnow the allegations further
• sustaining Section 10(b) claims where there was a “contrast between what company officials were hearing internally ... and what the company was telling the public at the same time” (emphasis in original)
• “Nothing in the complaint suggests that the [act] was fraudulent, even if, as the complaint alleges, it was a violation of [GAAP]”
• dismissing claims under Rule 9(b) where plaintiff (1) failed to allege particulars to support general allegations of inflated earnings through the use of improper accounting methods; and (2
• finding strong evidence of objective falsity sufficient to satisfy scienter pleading requirement
• “predictions about the future that prove to be off the mark likewise are immunized unless plaintiffs meet their burden of demonstrating intentional deception”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).