Precedent Setting Decisions
- Home
- Precedent Setting Decisions
Precedent Setting Decisions
Milberg’s tireless litigation efforts, which include victories before the United States Supreme Court, have set groundbreaking legal precedents that strengthened plaintiffs’ rights.
-
See MoreShaw v. Digital Equipment Corp.
Shaw v. Digital Equipment Corp., 82 F.3d 1194 (1st Cir. 1996)In this case, the First Circuit ruled that when filing a prospectus related to the issuance of securities, the issuer must disclose intra-quarter, materially adverse changes in its business. The court rejected the defendants’ argument that there was no duty to disclose until after the quarter ended. -
See MoreSouth Ferry LP #2 v. Killinger
South Ferry LP #2 v. Killinger, 542 F.3d 776 (9th Cir. 2008)This decision clarified whether a theory of scienter based on the “core operations” inference satisfies the PSLRA’s heightened pleading standard. In siding with the plaintiffs, the Ninth Circuit held that “[a]llegations that rely on the core operations inference are among the allegations that may be considered in the complete PSLRA analysis.” The court explained that under the “holistic” approach required by Tellabs, all allegations must be “read as a whole” in considering whether plaintiffs adequately pled scienter. -
See MoreTellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd.
Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd., 551 U.S. 308 (2007)Here, the United States Supreme Court announced a new uniform standard for evaluating the sufficiency of a complaint under the PSLRA. The court held that on a motion to dismiss, a court “must consider the complaint in its entirety,” accepting “all factual allegations in the complaint as true,” as well as “tak[ing] into account plausible opposing inferences.” On remand, the Seventh Circuit, applying this new uniform standard, unanimously sustained the complaint as sufficiently pled.
