Legal Opinion
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Bailey
District Court, S.D. Florida
Decided October 31, 1941No. 38, 39PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
STRUM, District Judge.
The fundamental question here presented is whether or not the defendants are selling “investment contracts” and hence “securities” as defined by § 2(1) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C.A. 77b(l), in violation of §§ 5(a) and 17(a) of said Act. 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 77e and 77q.
Two consolidated cases are before the court. In one (No. 38), E. R. Bailey’s Tungland, Inc., and in the other (No. 39), Ocala Ridge Tung Plantations, Inc., are the owners of large tracts of land in Marion County, Florida, said to be peculiarly suitable for growing tung trees. These companies are…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State v. Gopher Tire & Rubber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. Universal Service Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1939
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. PayneDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1940
- In re WaldsteinNew York Supreme Court · 1936
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. Crude Oil Corp. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1937
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. C. M. Joiner Leasing Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- The Johns Hopkins University v. William E. HuttonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1970
- Los Angeles Trust Deed & Mortgage Exchange v. Securities & Exchange CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
- Blackwell v. BentsenCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1953
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.