Legal Opinion
Betz v. Trainer Wortham & Co.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided May 23, 2011No. C 03-03231 SIPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge.
Currently before the Court is defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment on plaintiffs Securities Act, Section 10(b) claim and her claim of unfair business practices under California Business & Professions Code Section 17200. This case comes back to this Court on remand from the Ninth Circuit following the United States’ Supreme Court’s decision in Merck & Co. v. Reynolds, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1784, 176 L.Ed.2d 582 (2010). For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS defendants’…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. GilbertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Thornhill Publishing Company, Inc. v. General Telephone & Electronics CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Rose v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
- Carlucci v. HanDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2012
- BBAM Aircraft Management LP v. Babcock & Brown LLCDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2024
- Ensource Investments LLC v. WillisDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2019
- Hultman v. MattsonDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2024
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.