Legal Opinion
Cell v. Moore & Schley Securities Corp.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided December 15, 1989No. C4-89-76PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KEITH, Justice.
Gordon W. Cell brought this action against his stock brokers, Moore & Schley Securities Corporation (“Moore & Schley”), a New York corporation, and Joseph Jenkins, Jr., an employee of the corporation. Mr. Cell alleged that he had been fraudulently induced to enter into a “Customer’s and Margin Agreement” (“Agreement”), and sought to recover damages on various claims arising out of securities transactions between himself and Moore & Schley. Moore & Schley moved to dismiss and to compel arbitration pursuant to an arbitration clause in the Agreement. The Honorable P. Hunter…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Volt Info. Sciences, Inc. v. Bd. of Trustees of Leland Stanford Jr. U.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Southland Corp. v. KeatingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Siebert v. Amateur Athletic Union of United States, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2006
- Menzies Aviation, Inc. v. WilcoxDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2013
- Fouquette v. First American National Securities, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1991
- C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. v. Traffic Tech, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2021
- Chahla v. Jukko, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2018
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.