Tall v. MV Transp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a securities regulation requiring that the company’s accountant review the quarterly unaudited financial statements did not “associate” the accountant with those statements to such a degree that, without more, those statements became the accountant’s statements
• holding that a securities regulation requiring that the company’s accountant review the quarterly unaudited financial statements did not “associate” the accountant with those statements to such a degree that, without more, those statements became the accountant’s statements
• “assuming” without deciding the existence of a duty to correct and disposing of claims on other grounds
• dismissing action where plaintiffs failed to allege that defendant’s misstatements, rather than others that were “more consequential and numerous,” were the proximate cause of their loss
• a plaintiff must show “a sufficient connection between [the fraudulent conduct] and the losses suffered”
• Plaintiffs must \allege[ ] facts that would allow a factfinder to ascribe some rough proportion of the whole loss to [Defendants'] misstatements\; In re Williams Sec. Litig. , 496 F.Supp.2d 1195 , 1265-66 (N.D. Okla. 2007

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).