Legal Opinion

Betz v. Trainer Wortham & Co., Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided July 7, 2010No. 05-15704PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GOULD, Circuit Judge:

On this appeal we previously held that there is a genuine issue of material fact whether Heide Betz’s securities fraud claim against Trainer Wortham & Company, Inc., David P. Como, First Republic Bank, and Robert Vile (collectively Appellees) is time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 1658(b). Betz v. Trainer Wortham & Co., 519 F.3d 863, 871-72(9th Cir.2008), vacated, — U.S.-, 130 S.Ct. 2400, 176 L.Ed.2d 920 (2010). Appellees sought review of our decision through a petition for a writ of certiorari filed in the United States Supreme Court. After deciding the related case of Merck &…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Merck & Co. v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
  2. Betz v. Trainer Wortham & Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  3. Trainer Wortham & Co. v. BetzSupreme Court of the United States · 2010

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Stichting Pensioenfonds ABP v. Countrywide Financial Corp.District Court, C.D. California · 2011
  2. Strategic Diversity, Inc. v. Alchemix CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
  3. Edward Peruta v. County of San DiegoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
  4. Levier v. Department of Workforce Services, Workforce Appeals BoardCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2013
  5. York County v. Hp, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2023

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

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API