Ross v. ZVI Trading Corp. Employees' Money Purchase Pension Plan & Trust

How later courts describe this case

• holding that section 113(h) bars a challenge based upon RCRA
• upholding Louisiana’s ban on electioneering within 600-foot radius of polling places
• question presented: "Does state have burden of proving constitutional error to be harmless under Brecht v. Abrahamson?"
• under one approach towards pleading scienter adequately, “plaintiff can allege facts constituting circumstantial evidence of either reckless or conscious behavior” from which an intent may be inferred
• “We have recognized two distinct ways in which a plaintiff may plead scienter without direct knowledge of the defendant’s state of mind____ The second approach is to allege facts constituting circumstantial evidence of either recklessness or conscious behavior.”
• noting strict application of Rule 9(b) for attributed statements
• “[A] corporation is not required to disclose a fact merely because a reasonable investor would very must like to know that fact. Rather, an omission is actionable under the securities laws only when the corporation is subject to a duty to disclose the omitted facts.”