Legal Opinion
Rodger M. Arst v. Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Inc., and Odis E. Shoaf, Jr.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided June 11, 1996No. 95-3005PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KERN, District Judge.
In this appeal we are asked to consider whether the district court properly granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff-Appellant Rodger M. Arst (“Arst”) sued Defendants-Appellees Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Inc. (“Stifel Co.”) and Odis E. Shoaf, Jr. (“Shoaf’), asserting claims under Kansas common law for breach of fiduciary duty and claims under the Kansas Securities Act, Kan. Stat. Ann. § 17-253 (1994), and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78(j) (1981). We affirm the District Court’s grant of summary judgment in part and reverse in part…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Central Bank of Denver, N. A. v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Chiarella v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Dirks v. Securities & Exchange CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- State v. KellySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
- Schock v. NashSupreme Court of Delaware · 1999
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. WolfsonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
- Geman v. Securities & Exchange CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
- Federal Deposit Insurance v. Refco Group, Ltd.District Court, D. Colorado · 1997
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.