Legal Opinion
In Re ML-Lee Acquisition Fund II, L.P. & ML-Lee Acquisition Fund (Retirement Accounts) II, L.P. Securities Litigation
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided March 31, 1994No. Civ. A. 92-60-JJFPublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FARNAN, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Presently before the Court in this putative securities class action are a number of motions filed by both parties: (1) Defendants’ motions to dismiss the second consolidated amended complaint (“complaint”), 1 (2) Plaintiffs’ motion to disqualify Hutchins, Wheeler & Dittmar as counsel for the Lee Defendants, (3) Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, (4) Plaintiffs’ motion to file third consolidated amended complaint, and (5) two motions to compel filed by Plaintiffs. For the reasons stated, the Court will (1) grant in part and dismiss in part…
2Cases cited69 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Carnegie-Mellon University v. CohillSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. GilbertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- McCamish, Martin, Brown & Loeffler v. F.E. Appling InterestsTexas Supreme Court · 1999
- Grant Thornton LLP v. Prospect High Income FundTexas Supreme Court · 2010
- Sidney Olmsted v. Pruco Life Insurance Company Of New JerseyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
- Scottish Heritable Trust v. Peat Marwick Main & Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1996
- Guillen v. City of ChicagoDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1997
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.