Legal Opinion

Deveny v. ENTROPIN, INC.

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 10, 2006No. E036597PublishedCited by 59 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

HOLLENHORST, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs and appellants Joseph Deveny et al. appeal from judgment following the trial court’s granting of defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the basis of the affirmative defense of the statute of limitations in plaintiffs’ class action alleging securities violations. Plaintiffs contend the trial court erred in applying the doctrine of inquiry notice and in ignoring plaintiffs’ amended pleadings and related evidence under the “sham pleading” doctrine. Although we agree with the trial court’s conclusion that inquiry notice rather than actual…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Jolly v. Eli Lilly & Co.California Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Schifando v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
  4. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,366 Benjamin A. Cook v. Avien, Inc., James F. Pritchard, Benjamin A. Cook v. Avien, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1978
  5. April Enterprises, Inc. v. KTTVCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983

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

3Cited by59 opinions

  1. Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC v. BoyleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  2. Mt. Hawley Insurance v. LopezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  3. Hahn v. MirdaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  4. Minish v. Hanuman FellowshipCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  5. Greystone Homes, Inc. v. Midtec, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2008

54 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