Legal Opinion
In Re ZZZZ Best Securities Litigation
District Court, C.D. California
Decided August 12, 1994No. CV-87-3574-RSWL(Bx)PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
LEW, District Judge.
Defendant Ernst & Young, successor-in-interest to Ernst & Whinney (“E & Y”), has moved in the above captioned action for Summary Adjudication on Class Plaintiffs’ Section 10(b)/Rule 10b-5 claim for the commission of a manipulative or deceptive act in connection with the sale of securities (Count III). The matter came up regularly for hearing on July 18, 1994.
Now, having carefully considered all of the papers filed in support of and in opposition to the motions, as well as oral arguments, the Court hereby GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendant’s Motion for Summary…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Basic Inc. v. LevinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Central Bank of Denver, N. A. v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 90,266 Irene L. Wright, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Ernst & Young LLPCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- In Re McKesson HBOC, Inc. Securities LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2000
- In Re Silicon Graphics, Inc. Securities LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1997
- In Re Enron Corp. Securities, Derivative & ERISA Lit.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2002
- Pacific Investment Management Co. v. Mayer Brown LLPCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2010
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.