Legal Opinion
County of Orange v. Fuji Securities, Inc.
District Court, C.D. California
Decided December 16, 1998No. SA CV 96-1010-GLT [SF], Bankruptcy SA 94-22272-JRPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED SUMMARY ADJUDICATION OF ULTRA VIRES ISSUES
TAYLOR, District Judge.
The Court holds that, although they may have been unwise, speculative, or unduly risky, the reverse repurchase transactions made by the Orange County Treasurer in this case were not, on the theories presented here, ultra vires and thereby void under pre-1995 law. There was authority to act. Errors in the exercise of that authority, even grave errors, were not ultra vires.
I. BACKGROUND
Faced with over a billion dollars in investment losses, the County of Orange has sued its former broker, Fuji Securities Inc., and numerous…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Larson v. Domestic and Foreign Commerce Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Aaron v. Securities & Exchange CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Moyer v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Rodriguez v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- County of Orange v. Association of Orange County Deputy SheriffsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- General Motors Corp. v. Franchise Tax BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
- Opinion No. (2005), Oklahoma Attorney General Reports2005
- Opinion No. (2009), California Attorney General Reports2009
- Southern Inyo Healthcare District v. Optum Bank, Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. California · 2020