Legal Opinion
Department of Economic Development v. Arthur Andersen & Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided April 2, 1996No. 85 Civ. 1292 (MBM)PublishedCited by 72 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MUKASEY, District Judge.
The Department of Economic Development (“DED”), an agency of the British government operating principally in Northern Ireland, brings this securities fraud action against the accounting firm Arthur Andersen & Co. (“AA”) and three of its partners, Richard L. Measelle, Edward A Massura, and Richard E. Beckman. Defendants have moved for summary judgment on all claims on various grounds. For the reasons that follow, the motion is granted in part and denied in part as explained below.
I
A. A Brief Summary of the DeLorean Motor Co. Debacle 1 (1978-1983)
DED’s predecessors, the…
2Cases cited110 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Central Bank of Denver, N. A. v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
105 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by72 opinions
- Encyclopedia Brown Productions, Ltd. v. Home Box Office, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1998
- Paul Handeen v. Gregory A. Lemaire Henry Lemaire Patricia Lemaire, Orlins & Brainerd Law Firm Richard K. Brainerd Peter I. OrlinsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1997
- Jose Rolo v. City Investing Company Liquidating TrustCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
- In Re LavigneCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
- Witzman v. Lehrman, Lehrman & FlomSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.