Legal Opinion
Stern v. American Bankshares Corp.
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Decided March 29, 1977No. 75-C-730PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
WARREN, District Judge.
There are several motions filed by the defendants in this action attacking the sufficiency of the complaint. The first of these motions was filed by defendant Erickson. This motion requests a dismissal of Count I on the grounds that it fails to state the circumstances constituting fraud with particularity, or, in the alternative, the motion requests a more definite statement of the fraud alleged. The majority of the remaining defendants have joined defendant Erickson in this motion.
Rule 9 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that “in all…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,590 David Segal v. Lawrence Gordon, and Coburn Corporation of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1972
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,887 Sundstrand Corporation v. Sun Chemical CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1977
- Landry v. Federal Deposit Insurance CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1973
- In Re Caesars Palace Securities LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1973
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- Metge v. BaehlerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1985
- Rolf v. Blyth, Eastman Dillon & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,357 Marbury Management, Inc., and Harry Bader, Plaintiffs-Appellants-Appellees v. Alfred Kohn, and Wood, Walker & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,861 Gerald Mansbach v. Prescott, Ball & TurbenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1979
- Cammer v. BloomDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1989
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.