The case involves the Securities and Exchange Commission bringing a civil enforcement action against Andreas Badian, alleging he conspired in a scheme to manipulate Sedona Corporation's stock price through aggressive short selling before converting a debenture and later trades to create false demand, benefiting client Amro International. In this pretrial Memorandum Order, the court resolved multiple motions in limine from both parties on evidentiary issues including expert testimony, authenticity of recordings, witness credibility related to prior bonus payments, and exhibit designations. Applying Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and standards for relevance and reliability, the court excluded expert opinions that invaded the jury's role or lacked sufficient methodological basis while admitting other evidence meeting authenticity and procedural requirements, and it set a revised pretrial schedule.
This case concerns consolidated securities fraud claims brought by several institutional investors, including the Public Employees’ Retirement System of Mississippi, against Morgan Stanley entities and related parties under the Securities Act of 1933. The plaintiffs alleged that registration statements and prospectus supplements for various mortgage-backed security pass-through certificates contained material misrepresentations and omissions regarding loan underwriting standards, appraisal processes, loan-to-value ratios, and credit ratings. After prior partial dismissal of an earlier complaint, the court considered defendants’ motion to dismiss the second consolidated amended complaint on multiple grounds, including lack of standing, statutes of limitations and repose, failure to allege cognizable injury or actionable misstatements, and insufficient control-person claims. The court granted the motion in part and denied it in part, permitting some claims to proceed while dismissing others for procedural and pleading deficiencies.
This case is a putative class action by internet subscribers against Time Warner Cable alleging violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act through unauthorized throttling of peer-to-peer transmissions that damaged their computers, along with state-law claims for consumer fraud, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment based on advertisements promising high-speed service. The court addressed the defendant's Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings and Rule 56 motion for summary judgment, as well as the plaintiffs' Rule 12(f) motion to strike portions of supporting documents. It granted the motion to strike in full, granted the defendant's motion in part by dismissing Counts III through XI, and denied the motion in part as to the remaining CFAA counts, reasoning that the complaint adequately alleged unauthorized access and damage under 18 U.S.C. § 1030 for those counts while failing to state claims under the other theories.
This case involved former Assistant Store Managers at Starbucks stores in New York who sued the company under New York Labor Law § 196-d, alleging that Starbucks' tip distribution policy improperly excluded them from sharing in customer tips placed in collective tip boxes. The court granted Starbucks' motion for summary judgment in full and dismissed the complaint, without reaching the plaintiffs' class certification motion. The core reasoning was that Section 196-d does not grant any particular employees an entitlement to portions of a tip pool, Starbucks did not retain any tips for itself as all proceeds went to eligible baristas and shift supervisors, and the plaintiffs provided no evidence that Starbucks demanded, accepted, or retained tips given directly to ASMs.
In this case, plaintiff Loop Production sued defendants including Capital Connections LLC and individuals under the federal RICO statute and New York common law, alleging they fraudulently obtained a $40,000 wire transfer by claiming to book recording artist Nelly for a New Year's Eve event while lacking authority to do so and then refusing to refund the money after the transfer arrived. The court denied the moving defendants' motions to vacate the clerk's entry of default under Rule 55(c) and to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), and granted the plaintiff's motion for default judgment on the RICO and related claims. The court reasoned that the defendants' failure to respond meant the complaint's allegations of a pattern of racketeering activity through wire fraud were deemed admitted under Rule 8(b)(6), establishing liability, and calculated damages by trebling the $40,000 loss under RICO while also awarding prejudgment interest and attorneys' fees. The breach of contract claim was dismissed as duplicative of the RICO recovery.
This case involves parents of a minor student seeking reimbursement under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) from the New York City Department of Education for unilaterally placing their son in an out-of-state private residential therapeutic school after the local Committee on Special Education denied eligibility for special education services. An Impartial Hearing Officer found the student eligible as having an emotional disturbance and ordered reimbursement, but the State Review Officer reversed that determination, concluding the student did not meet any of the regulatory criteria for emotional disturbance. The district court reviewed the administrative record on cross-motions for summary judgment and granted judgment to the Department of Education, holding that the evidence did not establish the student's condition exhibited the required characteristics over a long period of time and to a marked degree that adversely affected educational performance. The court therefore upheld the denial of reimbursement.