Legal Opinion
Newby v. Enron Corp.
District Court, S.D. Texas
Decided August 24, 2007No. MDL-1446; Civil Action Nos. H-01-3624, G-03-0481PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
MELINDA HARMON, District Judge.
Pending before the Court in the above referenced cause are the RBC Defendants’ (collectively, “RBC’s”)1 motion to dismiss (instrument # 30) Plaintiffs’2 Second Amended Complaint3 pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9(b) and 12(b)(6) and RBC’s motion to strike Plaintiffs’ sur-reply4 (# 36).
Plaintiffs allege that RBC conspired with and aided and abetted Enron in defrauding them and other investors by helping to devise and implement complex sham transactions (Alberta, LJM2, Hawaii Trusts, and Cerberus) whose only function was to help Enron…
2Cases cited88 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Baxter v. PalmigianoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Collins v. Morgan Stanley Dean WitterCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2000
83 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- In Re Enron Corporation Securities, DerivativeDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2007