Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• there is no requirement under Rule 10b-5 of a \specific oral or written statement .... [c]onduct itself can be deceptive\
• it is an “established principle that the jurisdiction of the federal courts is carefully guarded against expansion by judicial interpretation” (quoting Am. Fire & Cas. Co. v. Finn, 341 U.S. 6, 17, 71 S.Ct. 534, 95 L.Ed. 702 (1951)
• it is an “established principle that the jurisdiction of the federal courts is carefully guarded against expansion by judicial interpretation” (quoting Am. Fire & Cas. Co. v. Finn, 341 U.S. 6, 17, 71 S.Ct. 534, 95 L.Ed. 702 (1951)) (internal quotations omitted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).