Weber v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• finding “Plaintiff’s purchase of stock six days after the Class Period” to be “irrelevant” and noting that “[i]t is not inconsistent with the pleadings for Plaintiff to have purchased stock after its price had been deflated by curative disclosures” (emphasis added)
• finding numerosity satisfied given that the defendants’ stock traded on the NYSE, had a daily trading volume of roughly 1.8 million shares, and had roughly 86 million to 99 million shares outstanding as of the dates the company filed its annual reports with the SEC during relevant years
• “It is well-recognized that class actions are a particularly appropriate means for resolving securities fraud actions”
• “The first requirement ... acts to ensure that the representatives have interests co-extensive with, rather than antagonistic to, the interests of the other class members.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).