Ramco-Gershenson Properties L.P. v. Hoover Annex Group LLC
District Court, E.D. Michigan
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
FEIKENS, District Judge.
This cause of action arises out of Plaintiffs Purchase Agreement to buy Defendants’ shopping center. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants violated (i) the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. § 78j) and the rules issued pursuant to that section including Rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5; (ii) the Purchase Agreement’s warranties; and (iii) a class action settlement agreement, thus harming Plaintiff as a third-party beneficiary. Defendants move to dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint in its entirety. In my consideration of that motion I have concluded…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Neogen Corporation v. Neo Gen Screening, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
- Harry L. Reynolds, Jr. v. International Amateur Athletic Federation, the Athletic CongressCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1994
- Painewebber, Inc. v. Alfred M. Cohen, of the Estate of Samuel GinsburgCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
- Soberay MacHine & Equipment Company, (96-3946 97-3308)/cross-Appellee v. Mrf Limited, Inc., Defendant-Appellee/cross-Appellant (96-3997)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Reyna Capital Corp. v. Millennium Leasing & Financial Services, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2006