Legal Opinion
Tanne v. Autobytel, Inc.
District Court, C.D. California
Decided March 15, 2005No. Nos. CV04-8987 MMM (JWJx), CV0409551 MMM (PJWx)PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER APPOINTING LEAD PLAINTIFF AND APPROVING LEAD COUNSEL
MORROW, District Judge.
This is a securities fraud action brought pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (“PSLRA” or the “Reform Act”). On January 28, 2005, the court entered an order consolidating five related actions pursuant to the parties’ stipulation.1 Four plaintiffs have now moved for appointment as Lead Plaintiff, and for approval of their counsel as lead counsel.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND2
The plaintiff class encompasses investors who purchased or acquired the…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- In Re: Cendant Corporation LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
- In Re Northern District of California, Dalkon Shield Iud Products Liability Litigation.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Johnny B. McGOWAN, Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. FAULKNER CONCRETE PIPE COMPANY, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- In re Oxford Health Plans Inc., Securities LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Labauve v. Olin Corp.District Court, S.D. Alabama · 2005
- Carr v. Analogic CorporationDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2018
- Clair v. DelucaDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2005
- Courter v. CytoDyn IncDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2021
- Crist v. EisnerAmper LLPDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2025
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.