Legal Opinion
Stinson v. Van Valley Development Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided August 10, 1989No. Civ. A. 87-7922PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HANNUM, Senior District Judge.
The issue is whether a fraud-created-the-market presumption of reliance is available to the plaintiffs, Gilda Stinson and Robert Stinson (“Stinsons”). The Stinsons allege that they and the class they seek to represent were defrauded in their purchase of Copper Lake Manor revenue bonds. 1 In response to the Court’s May 19,1989 Memorandum and Order, which, inter alia, dismissed their complaint for failure to adequately allege reliance under section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and Securities and Exchange…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Basic Inc. v. LevinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Allan J. Jablonski v. Pan American World Airways, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1988
- Massarsky v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1983
- Cammer v. BloomDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1989
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Adrian Freeman v. Laventhol & HorwathCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- Wiley v. Hughes Capital Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1990
- Greenberg Ex Rel. Greenberg v. Boettcher & Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1991
- Gruber v. Price WaterhouseDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1991
- Dalton v. Alston & BirdDistrict Court, S.D. Illinois · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.