Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 16754 *; 960 F.3d 94
RONALD JACKSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ROBERT E. ABERNATHY, STEVEN E. VOSKUIL, KIMBERLY-CLARK CORPORATION, THOMAS J. FALK, MARK A. BUTHMAN, AVANOS MEDICAL, INC., Defendants-Appellees, HALYARD HEALTH, INC., Defendant.
Prior History: [*1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. No. 16-cv-5093, Laura Taylor Swain, Judge. Appellant Ronald Jackson appeals the denial of his motion to file an amended securities fraud complaint against the manufacturers of an allegedly defective surgical gown. The district court (Swain, J.) denied Jackson's motion as futile because he failed to raise a strong inference of scienter against any of the defendants. On appeal, Jackson pursues only his claims against the corporate defendants. We affirm the district court's order, concluding that Jackson cannot raise a strong inference of collective corporate scienter by (1) relying on the knowledge of employees unconnected to the challenged statements or (2) pleading that the challenged statements concerned a key product with which the company's senior management would be expected to be familiar.
Jackson v. Avanos Med., Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55969 (S.D.N.Y., Mar. 31, 2019)
scienter, gown, imputed, senior, fraudulent, misstatements, surgical
Securities Law, Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Actions, Implied Private Rights of Action, Elements of Proof, Civil Procedure, Appeals, Standards of Review, Abuse of Discretion, Pleadings, Amendment of Pleadings, Leave of Court, De Novo Review, Postoffering & Secondary Distributions, Heightened Pleading Requirements, Elements of Proof, Scienter