Legal Opinion
Elliott v. Albright
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 19, 1989No. H003795PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
PREMO, J.
Defendants Donald Albright, and Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis (hereafter Paine Webber) appeal from the denial of their motion to compel arbitration of plaintiffs’ claim under section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 [15 U.S.C.A. § 77q] (hereafter 1933 Act).
Plaintiffs Beatrice L. Elliott, Jeanne E. Hubbard, Roy K. Hubbard, William J. Hubbard, Abdallah Moussa, Robert J. Parsons, and Richard B. Frazer filed a complaint in 1986 containing 56 causes of action under California law, the 1933 Act, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act, 18 United States Code…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Shearson/American Express Inc. v. McMahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Scherk v. Alberto-Culver Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Wilko v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Schmidlin v. City of Palo AltoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Coleman v. Medtronic, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2014
- Kindred v. Second Judicial District Court of NevadaNevada Supreme Court · 2000
- Blue Cross of California v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Truly Nolen of America v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.