Legal Opinion
Lennerth v. Mendenhall
District Court, N.D. Ohio
Decided August 5, 1964No. Civ. A. C 64-220PublishedCited by 68 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CONNELL, Chief Judge.
Plaintiffs instituted the within action charging the several defendants with fraud and deceit in the sale of securities,, and seeking rescission of the sale. Thereafter they caused most of the-named defendants to be served with process according to law. The complaint, specifically states that the action arises under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.A. § 78(j)). After filing the complaint, during the investigation of the case by the plaintiffs, it has supposedly come to their attention that the alleged securities which the plaintiffs bought were not the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Dioguardi v. DurningCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- Elias Siegelman, Individually, and as Administrator of the Estate of Eva Siegelman, Deceased v. Cunard White Star LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
- Gins v. Mauser Plumbing Supply Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
- Jameson v. JamesonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1949
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by68 opinions
- Pinter v. DahlSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Myzel v. FieldsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1967
- Haberman v. Washington Public Power Supply SystemWashington Supreme Court · 1988
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,588 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Stephen MurphyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Globus v. Law Research Service, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1969
63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.