Legal Opinion
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Antar
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided November 17, 2000No. 2:93-cv-03988PublishedCited by 65 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ACKERMAN, District Judge.
This matter comes before the court on the motion of plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) for summary judgment on its claims against relief defendants Rose Antar, R.A.S. Partnership, L.P. and S.T. Partnership, L.P. The relief defendants oppose the motion on the grounds that it is both premature and without merit. For the reasons set forth below, plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is granted.
Factual and Procedural Background
The details of the extensive securities fraud perpetrated by defendant Sam M. Antar and others have been described at…
2Cases cited53 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. KrogerSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Lightning Lube, Inc. v. Witco Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury v. Sealed Air Corp. (In Re W.R. Grace & Co.)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · 2002
- Epperson v. Entertainment Express, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Pfizer Inc., a Delaware Corporation v. Margaret Uprichard, an IndividualCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- Daneman v. Stanley (In Re Stanley)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · 2008
- Federal Trade Commission v. NeiswongerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2009
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.