Citations (4)


Footnotes (60)



Pleading After Tellabs

Geoffrey P. Miller

New York University School of Law

April 1, 2008

NYU Law and Economics Research Paper No. 08-16

In Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd., the Supreme Court held that a securities fraud complaint will survive a motion to dismiss only if a reasonable person would deem the inference of [culpable state of mind] cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference one could draw from the facts alleged. This paper analyzes how the Tellabs test may be applied, identifies questions left open under the decision, and discusses broader implications of the opinion and the PSLRA. Among other things, the paper suggests that the PSLRA's heightened pleading rules have deformed the motion to dismiss to the point where it now operates in securities fraud cases as a hybrid falling somewhere in between the traditional Rule 12(b)(6) and Rule 56 summary judgment procedures.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 35

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: April 18, 2008 ; Last revised: November 9, 2008

Suggested Citation

Miller, Geoffrey P., Pleading After Tellabs (April 1, 2008). NYU Law and Economics Research Paper No. 08-16. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1121396 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1121396

Contact Information

Geoffrey P. Miller (Contact Author)
New York University School of Law ( email )
Center for the Study of Central Banks
40 Washington Square South
New York, NY 10012-1099
United States
212-998-6329 (Phone)
212-995-4590 (Fax)

Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,099
Downloads: 216
Download Rank: 111,324
Citations:  4
Footnotes:  60