Legal Opinion

Callahan v. Class One, Inc.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 13, 1991No. 90-208PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.

This court has consistently held that any sale of securities which have not been registered as required by R.C. Chapter 1707 — or which are not exempt from those requirements — will materially affect the protection afforded by the statute. Pencheff v. Adams (1983), 5 Ohio St. 3d 153, 5 OBR 318, 449 N.E. 2d 1277; Bronaugh v. R. & E. Dredging Co. (1968), 16 Ohio St. 2d 35, 45 O.O. 2d *77321, 242 N.E. 2d 572. The Montgomery County Court of Appeals has fashioned an exception to this rule where the buyer initiates the sale. That exception would upset a well-settled scheme of regulation designed to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bronaugh v. R. & E. Dredging Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Pencheff v. AdamsOhio Supreme Court · 1983

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Boland v. HammondOhio Court of Appeals · 2001
  2. Riedel v. Acutote of ColoradoDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1991
  3. Murphy v. Stargate Defense Systems Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
  4. Bitounis v. Interactive Brokers, L.L.C.Ohio Supreme Court · 2026
  5. Murphy v. Stargate Defense SysCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API