State v. Soley

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a plaintiff may satisfy the Rule 9(b) pleading standard with factual allegations of circumstantial evidence if the evidence helps explain “how and why the statement was misleading when made”
• reviewing a district court’s grant of a motion to dismiss de novo
• relying in part on news reporting to infer that a statement in the defendant company’s proxy materials was misleading and reversing the district court, which had disregarded the articles on the ground that they did not provide sufficient details
• “A statement is materially misleading when the defendants’ representations, taken together and in context, would have misled a reasonable investor.” (quotation marks omitted)
• “We do not find those alleged negotiations [to relist] so obviously unimportant to a reasonable investor as to allow the dismissal of appellants’ claims.” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).