Legal Opinion

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Barrett Herrick & Co.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided March 7, 1957PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SUGARMAN, District Judge.

In his brief in opposition to the within motion the receiver’s counsel states:

“There is no controversy over the facts between the parties to this motion.

“The petitioner, Armstrong, a customer of the broker-dealer firm of Barrett Herrick & Co., Inc., purchased on August 30, 1956, from Barrett Herrick, as principal, 300 shares of American Mutual Fund for a total price of $3,096.00.

“Payment for such stock was due four business days later, to wit, September 6, 1956. On that date the petitioner sent by mail her check for $3,096.00 to Barrett Herrick, payable to that…

2Cases cited7 opinions

Vanston Bondholders Protective Committee v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
In re BolognesiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1918
In re Walter J. Schmidt & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1923
In Re RuskayCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
In re BrownCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1910

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

3Cited by2 opinions

Lankenau v. Coggeshall & HicksCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1965
John C. Lankenau, Esq., as Receiver of Lester D. Brown, D/B/A L. D. Brown Co. v. Coggeshall & Hicks, Applicant-Appellee. This Case Came Up on Appeal Under the Style SEC v. Brown, That Used in the District Court. Upon Request, However, the Case on Appeal Has Been Renamed, as Indicated. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Lester D. Brown, D/B/A L. D. Brown Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1965