Legal Opinion
Himebaugh v. Smith
District Court, C.D. California
Decided October 6, 1978No. 77-2935-WMBPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
WM. MATTHEW BYRNE, Jr., District Judge.
I. Introduction
This is a class action suit alleging violation of certain anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws. On May 4, 1978, the court granted the motion of defendant Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards, Inc. (“Bate-man”) for leave to file a Third Party Complaint against J. Streicher & Co. and others (jointly hereinafter referred to as the “Joint Account”). The Third Party Complaint states causes of action for indemnity, contribution, and violation of the federal securities laws. The present motions concern the third party plaintiff and…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Scherk v. Alberto-Culver Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Wilko v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission v. Holiday Tours, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1977
- Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. WareSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Coenen v. R. W. Pressprich & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- In Re Related Asbestos CasesDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1982
- Coar v. BrownDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1983
- Protect Our Water v. FlowersDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2004
- N. Donald & Co. v. American United Energy Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1984
- N. Donald & Co. v. American United Energy Corp.District Court, D. Colorado · 1984
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.