Legal Opinion
Steiner v. Southmark Corp.
District Court, N.D. Texas
Decided April 5, 1990No. Civ. A. CA3-89-1387-D, CA3-89-1402-D and CA3-89-1492-DPublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FITZWATER, District Judge:
The instant motions to dismiss in these three related securities fraud actions require the court to address recurring questions of Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b) pleading sufficiency inevitably presented in such actions. The court is also called upon to decide whether plaintiffs have stated claims for relief pursuant to § 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. § 77k, and Texas common law theories.
I
Plaintiffs are purchasers of Southmark Corporation (“Southmark”) securities publicly issued from January 1, 1986 through May 17, 1989. 1 They purport to act on behalf of all…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Basic Inc. v. LevinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Herman & MacLean v. HuddlestonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Howard Wool v. Tandem Computers Incorporated, Robert C. Marshall, Henry v. Morgan, and James G. TreybigCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Semegen v. WeidnerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- McCamish, Martin, Brown & Loeffler v. F.E. Appling InterestsTexas Supreme Court · 1999
- In Re Enron Corp. Securities, Derivative & ERISADistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2003
- In Re Enron Corp. Securities, Derivative & ERISA Lit.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2002
- Steve Simms v. Jerral JonesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2016
- In Re Enron Corp. SecuritiesDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2006
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.