Legal Opinion
Metz v. Unizan Bank
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided August 19, 2011No. 09-3751, 09-3879, 09-4363PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SILER, Circuit Judge.
After falling victim to a Ponzi scheme, the Metz, Loyd, and Blair plaintiffs (collectively “Plaintiffs”) sued a number of banks to recover their lost investments. The district court dismissed all claims filed by the Loyd and Blair plaintiffs as time-barred. It dismissed most claims filed by the Metz plaintiffs as time-barred or for their failure to state a claim but allowed two fraud claims to proceed, both of which were ultimately unsuccessful. The Plaintiffs now appeal. For the reasons below, we AFFIRM.
I
The Plaintiffs’ suits arise out of a Ponzi scheme…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Freeport-McMoRan Inc. v. K N Energy, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Vega v. T-MOBILE USA, INC.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2009
- Kevin W. Ziegler v. Ibp Hog Market, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
- Investors REIT One v. JacobsOhio Supreme Court · 1989
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- F5 Capital v. PappasCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2017
- Pilgrim v. Universal Health Card, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2011
- Regis Lutz v. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013
- Louisiana v. American National Property & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2014
- Carol Smith v. Perkins Board of EducationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.