Legal Opinion
Driscoll v. Smith Barney, Harris, Upham & Co.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided April 28, 1987No. Nos. 85-5921, 85-3816 and 86-3009PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
VANCE, Circuit Judge:
These separate suits arise out of the alleged mismanagement of securities accounts by Smith Barney, Harris, Upham & Co. (Smith Barney) and its employees. Richard Driscoll asserts claims against Smith Barney and Richard Shalla for violations of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 1934 Act) and for breach of fiduciary duty under Florida law. Edward and Ruth Adrian also allege violations of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the 1934 Act and breach of fiduciary duty, along with claims under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. ByrdSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Wilko v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Hercules & Co. v. Shama Restaurant Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Fortner v. ThomasCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1993
- Fortner v. ThomasCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1993
- Wheat, First Securities, Inc. v. GreenCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1993
- Rush v. Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1988
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.