Legal Opinion
Betz v. Trainer Wortham & Co., Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided October 4, 2007No. 05-15704PublishedCited by 73 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 there is a genuine issue of material fact whether Betz’s claim is 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…
2Cases cited34 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
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by73 opinions
- Platt Electrical Supply, Inc. v. Eoff Electrical, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Planning BoardNew York Court of Appeals · 2007
- In Re Metropolitan Securities LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · 2007
- Betz v. Trainer Wortham & Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Oaktree Capital Management, L.P. v. KPMGDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2013
68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.