Legal Opinion
Heide Betz v. Trainer Wortham & Company, Inc. David P. Como First Republic Bank, a Nevada Corporation Robert Vile
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided May 11, 2007No. 05-15704PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GOULD, Circuit Judge.
We must decide whether Heide Betz’s federal securities fraud claim is barred by the statute of limitations. 1 We hold that Betz’s claim is not time barred, and we reverse the district court’s summary judgment for the defendants.
I
On an appeal of summary judgment we, like the district court, view the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and draw all justifiable inferences in the non-moving party’s favor. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986). Viewed in the light most favorable to Betz, the facts are…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Cannon v. University of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Antonio Abrego Abrego v. The Dow Chemical Co Shell Oil Company, D/B/A Shell Chemical Company, and Shell Agricultural Chemical CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. GilbertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Qwest Services Corp. v. BloodSupreme Court of Colorado · 2011
- In Re Maxim Integrated Products, Inc. Securities LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2009
- Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Betz v. Trainer WorthamCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.