Legal Opinion
In Re Royal Dutch/Shell Transport Securities Litigation
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided December 12, 2005No. 04-374 (JAP)PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PISANO, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
The claims in this putative securities fraud class action stem from the dissemination of what Lead Plaintiff characterizes as “materially false and misleading statements” concerning the reported proved oil and natural gas reserves of the Royal Dutch Petroleum Company and the Shell Transport and Trading Company, PLC (together, “Royal Dutch/Shell”). See Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint (“Complaint”) ¶ 3. Defendants filed motions to dismiss the Complaint, on which Chief Judge Bissell heard extensive oral argument and ultimately resolved in…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Faragher v. City of Boca RatonSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Connecticut National Bank v. GermainSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. BroudoSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- In Re: Cendant Corporation LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Acticon AG v. China North East Petroleum Holdings Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2012
- Varghese v. China Shenghuo Pharmaceutical Holdings, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2009
- Royal Park Investments SA/NV v. HSBC Bank USA, National Ass'nDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2015
- Prime Mover Capital Partners L.P. v. Elixir Gaming Technologies, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2011
- In Re Cigna Corp. Securities LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.