Legal Opinion
New England Health Care Employees Pension Fund, on Behalf of Itself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Ernst & Young, LLP
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided July 9, 2003No. 01-6523PublishedCited by 171 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DAVID A. NELSON, Circuit Judge.
Private lawsuits impliedly authorized under § 10(b) of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act, the Supreme Court held in Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. Gilbertson, 501 U.S. 350, 111 S.Ct. 2773, 115 L.Ed.2d 321 (1991), are subject to the statutory limitations provision established in § 9(e) of the Act. Private securities fraud actions must thus be “brought within one year after discovery of the facts constituting the violation and within three years after such violation.” See 15 U.S.C. § 78i(e).
The present action, a § 10(b) securities fraud case…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Herman & MacLean v. HuddlestonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. GilbertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Rothman v. GregorCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- James G. Jackson v. City of Columbus, Gregory Lashutka, Thomas W. Rice, Sr.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by171 opinions
- Merck & Co. v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- City Of Monroe Employees Retirement System v. Bridgestone CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
- Wyser-Pratte Management Co., Inc. v. Telxon Corporation, Pricewaterhousecoopers, LLPCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
- Joseph Bailey v. City of Ann ArborCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
- Passa v. City of ColumbusCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
166 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.