Legal Opinion
Brantley v. EF Hutton & Co., Inc.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 30, 1989No. Civ. 86-1012PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LOUIS H. POLLAK, J.
Defendant E.F. Hutton & Company, Inc. (“Hutton”) moves to dismiss all of the counts of the plaintiffs’ amended complaint for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). On count two of the amended complaint, defendant moves in the alternative for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. Defendant also requests sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, arguing that the amended complaint contains information unrelated to plaintiffs’ claim.
This case is the third of three cases — the first two were…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Santa Fe Industries, Inc. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Michael E. Moss v. Morgan Stanley Inc., E. Jacques Courtois, Jr., Adrian Antoniu, and James M. Newman, Morgan Stanley Inc. And James M. NewmanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
- In Re Data Access Systems Securities Litigation. Appeal of Tolins & Lowenfels & Roger A. Tolins. Appeal of I. Kahlowsky and Co. And Peter CunicelliCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1988
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Berk v. Ascott Investment Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1991
- In Re Ikon Office Solutions, Inc. Securities LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1999
- Bormann v. Applied Vision Systems, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1992
- Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Sumi OhnumaNew York Supreme Court · 1994
- Marcus v. SHAPIRO, ABRAMSON & SCHWIMMER, PADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.