Cady v. Murphy
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
MAGRUDER, Circuit Judge.
This appeal requires for its disposition an interpretation of § 12(2) of the Securities Act of 1933,1 48 Stat. 74. The challenged judgment for plaintiff-appellee cannot stand if, as the defendants maintain, the liability imposed by § 12(2) applies only to owners of securities, selling their own property as principals.
The plaintiff is a small securities broker and dealer doing business in Portland, Maine, under the name of Clifford J. Murphy Co. For many years he had extensive dealings with the defendants, a firm of stock brokers carrying on a general brokerage business…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Murphy v. CadyDistrict Court, D. Maine · 1939
- Peterson v. McManusSupreme Court of Iowa · 1919
3Cited by62 opinions
- Pinter v. DahlSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Haberman v. Washington Public Power Supply SystemWashington Supreme Court · 1988
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,588 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Stephen MurphyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Demarco v. EdensCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1968
- Fratt v. RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1953
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.