The Etruria

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 “purported conflict” based on the timing of securities purchases was “speculative as to adequacy at this stage and thus not grounds to defeat certification”
• “For every 25 individual question of whether each investor had actual knowledge stemming from these reports, 26 there are scores of common facts and questions about the content of each and every media 27 report.”
• “In securities fraud class actions relating to publicly owned and nationally listed corporations, the numerosity requirement may be satisfied by a showing that a large number of shares were outstanding and traded during the relevant period.” (quotation marks omitted)
• “[I]f there is to be an error made, let it be in favor and not against the maintenance of the class action, for it is always subject to modification should later developments during the course of the trial so require.”
• “[W]hether any investor . . . gained relevant actual knowledge from media 2 reports precluding their claim presents another common question as to whether the relevant media 3 reports conveyed all of the truth Plaintiffs allege was misstated or omitted.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).