In Re DRDGOLD Ltd. Securities Litigation’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “While in a misstatement of fact case the falsity and scienter requirements present separate inquiries, in false statement of opinion cases ... the falsity and scienter requirements are essentially identical. That is because a material misstatement of fact is alleged by pointing to the true fact about the world that contradicts the misstatement. But even if the statement of fact (“the company made x million dollars in profit last year”) turns out to be objectively false, it could have been made in good faith; subjective intent to commit fraud is a wholly separate inquiry from whether the statement is objectively true. However, a material misstatement of opinion is by its nature a false statement, not about the objective world, but about the defendant’s own belief. Essentially, proving the falsity of the statement “I believe this investment is sound” is the same as proving scienter, since the statement (unlike a statement of fact) cannot be false at all unless the speaker is knowingly misstating his truly held opinion. As with all inquiries into someone’s state of mind, plaintiffs must typically rely on circumstantial evidence for the defendants’ words and actions.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 499 F. Supp. 2d 117 - Malin v. XL Capital Ltd.

2. “(a) To employ any^ device, scheme, or artifice to defraud, (b) To make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or (c) To engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person, in connection with the purchase or sale . of any security.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 699 F. Supp. 2d 534 - Wilson v. DALENE

3. “[T]he dispositive factor [regarding motive] is that other insiders, including two other individual defendants, did not sell during the putative class period.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Frankfurt-Trust Inv. Luxemburg AG v. United Techs. Corp.