Legal Opinion
Stegall v. Ladner
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided October 14, 2005No. CIV.A. 05-10062-DPWPublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
WOODLOCK, District Judge.
Plaintiff William Stegall seeks recovery for himself and others similarly situated from certain directors, investment advisers, and affiliates of the John Hancock Family of Funds (the “Funds”). Plaintiff contends that defendants improperly failed to participate in securities class actions in which the Funds were putative members. Defendants have moved to dismiss the action. For the reasons provided below, that motion will be granted.
I. Standard of Review
In considering a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), a court must take…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Allen v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Robinson v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Halebian v. BervCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2009
- Potter v. Janus Investment FundDistrict Court, S.D. Illinois · 2007
- Forsythe v. Sun Life Financial, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2006
- Danielle Santomenno v. John Hancock Life Insurance CoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2012
- In Re Eaton Vance Mutual Funds Fee LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2005
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.