Legal Opinion
Hockey v. Medhekar
District Court, N.D. California
Decided July 11, 1996No. C-96-0815 MHPPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PATEL, District Judge.
Plaintiff Robert Hockey (“Hockey”) brought this action on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated against various defendants in connection with the purchase and sale of common stock in Alliance Semiconductor Corporation. The complaint contains a single claim of securities fraud under section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and accompanying Rule 1 Ob-5, and controlling persons allegations under section 20 of that Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78t(a).
Now before the court is defendants’ motion for partial reconsideration of the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Connecticut National Bank v. GermainSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Morton v. MancariSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Regional Rail Reorganization Act CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Rubin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Estate of Cowart v. Nicklos Drilling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ajit K. Medhekar v. United States District Court For The Northern District Of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- In Re Comdisco Securities LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2001
- Medhekar v. United States District Court for the Northern District of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996