Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
396 F.3d 161 *; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 1016 **; Fed. Sec. L. Rep. (CCH) P93,077
John Kilgour Lentell, Brett Raynes and Juliet Raynes, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. and Henry M. Blodget, Defendants-Appellees, Thomas P. Willcutts, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Yolanda Rice, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Neil Trama, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Brent Wickam, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Marie Forte, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, C. Anthony Martignetti Trust, and on behalf of those similarly situated, Bob Raiano, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated, Christophe De Reynal, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Diane Pilgrim, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Turgut Ergun, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Doug Seidenburg, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Robert Rueben, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated and Fulgham, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Consolidated-Plaintiffs, Abraham Twersky Family Trust, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated and John Deleo, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs.
Subsequent History: US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Lentell v. Merrill Lynch & Co., 126 S. Ct. 421, 163 L. Ed. 2d 321, 2005 U.S. LEXIS 7318 (U.S., Oct. 11, 2005)
Prior History: [**1] John Kilgour Lentell and Brett and Juliet Raynes, as lead plaintiffs for a putative class of purchasers of the publicly traded stock of two internet companies, appeal from the dismissal by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Pollack, J.) of their securities-fraud actions against Merrill Lynch & Co. and Henry M. Blodget. Plaintiffs' core allegation is that Merrill Lynch, through Blodget and other research analysts, recommended that investors purchase certain publicly traded stocks even though they did not then believe that the issuing companies were a good investment. Among other grounds cited for dismissal, the district court ruled that the complaints were time-barred and (even if not time-barred) that they fail to plead loss causation as required by the decisions of this Court. We conclude that the underlying complaints were timely filed, but we affirm the dismissal because the complaints fail to plead that the alleged misrepresentations and omissions caused the losses claimed.
In re Merrill Lynch & Co. Research Reports Sec. Litig., 273 F. Supp. 2d 351, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11005 (S.D.N.Y., 2003)
Disposition: Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Media, recommendations, omissions, analysts, causation, ratings, complaints, Internet, buy, concealed, investor, stock, misrepresentations, accumulate, district court, misstatements, allegations, inquiry notice, foreseeable, issuer, cases, false and misleading, appreciation, losses, fraudulent, articles, investment-banking, consolidated, materialized, plaintiffs'
Civil Procedure, Defenses, Demurrers & Objections, Motions to Dismiss, Failure to State Claim, Appeals, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Dismissal, Involuntary Dismissals, Failure to State Claims, Governments, Legislation, Statute of Limitations, Time Limitations, Securities Law, Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Actions, Implied Private Rights of Action, Deceptive & Manipulative Devices, Types of Securities, Investment Contracts, Joint Ventures & Partnerships, Criminal Law & Procedure, Fraud, Securities Fraud, Elements, Securities Act Actions, Civil Liability, General Overview, Responses, Motions to Dismiss, Pleadings, Heightened Pleading Requirements, Fraud Claims, Civil Liability Considerations, Securities Litigation Reform & Standards, Postoffering & Secondary Distributions, Heightened Pleading Requirements, Business & Corporate Law, Management Duties & Liabilities, Causes of Action, Fraud & Misrepresentation, Discovery, Methods of Discovery, Inspection & Production Requests, Blue Sky Laws, Offers & Sales, Misconduct During Discovery, Motions to Compel, Express Liabilities, Price Manipulation, Disclosures, Bespeaks Caution Doctrine, Contracts Law, Consideration, Enforcement of Promises, Antitrust & Trade Law, Sherman Act, Claims, Torts, Causation, Proximate Cause, Foreseeability of Harm, Elements, Intervening Causation, Online Transactions