Merck & Co. v. Reynolds, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 3671 (Apr. 27, 2010)

LexisNexis Overview: "Discovery" of facts that put investors on "inquiry notice" did not automatically begin 28 U.S.C.S. § 1658(b)'s limitations period, and since scienter was a "fact" and an FDA warning letter and products liability suits showed little if nothing about a drug company's fraudulent intent, a 15 U.S.C.S. § 78j(b) securities fraud suit was timely.

Counsel: Kannon K. Shanmugam argued the cause for petitioner.

Evan R. Chesler argued the cause for petitioner.

David C. Frederick argued the cause for the respondent.

Max W. Berger argued the cause for the respondent.

David A. P. Brower argued the cause for the respondent.

Judge: BREYER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C.J., and KENNEDY, GINSBURG, ALITO, and SOTOMAYOR, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. SCALIA, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which THOMAS, J., joined.

Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced version of Merck & Co. v. Reynolds

Non-subscribers can view the free, unenhanced version of Merck & Co. v. Reynolds on lexisONE's Free Case Law