Legal Opinion
Berry v. Valence Technology, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided April 29, 1999No. 97-17346PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FLETCHER,. Circuit Judge:
Plaintiffs, a class of persons who purchased stock in Valence Technology, Inc. (Valence) within a specified 27-month period, sued Valence and several of its officers for securities fraud in violation of section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. The district court granted Va*701lence’s motion for summary judgment, holding that Plaintiffs’ claims were barred by the statute of limitations because Plaintiffs were on “inquiry notice” of the possibility of fraud more than one year before they filed suit. On appeal, Plaintiffs argue that “actual discovery,” not…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug StoresSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. GilbertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Topalian v. EhrmanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992
- Steckman v. Hart Brewing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Regina Warshaw and John D. Kaufman, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Xoma Corporation Steven C. MendellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Rothman v. GregorCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- Livid Holdings Ltd. v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Narvis G. Nonnette v. Larry Small R. Schelke E. Castro D. Johnson M.A. Corbin J. BuiltmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- New England Health Care Employees Pension Fund, on Behalf of Itself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Ernst & Young, LLPCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
- Livid Holdings Ltd v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.