Legal Opinion
Gustafson v. Alloyd Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided February 28, 1995No. 93-404PublishedCited by 1,245 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Kennedy
Under § 12(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 buyers have an express cause of action for rescission against sellers who make material misstatements or omissions “by means of a prospectus.” The question presented is whether this right of rescission extends to a private, secondary transaction, on the theory that recitations in the purchase agreement are part of a “prospectus.”
I
Petitioners Gustafson, McLean, and Butler (collectively Gustafson) were in 1989 the sole shareholders of Alloyd, Inc., a manufacturer of plastic packaging and automatic heat sealing equipment. Alloyd was formed, and its…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Federal Deposit Insurance v. MeyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug StoresSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Central Bank of Denver, N. A. v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Herman & MacLean v. HuddlestonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1,245 opinions
- Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Lira v. HerreraCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Gonzales v. OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Ragsdale v. Wolverine World Wide, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
1,240 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.