Legal Opinion

Prochaska & Associates, Inc. v. Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith, Inc.

District Court, D. Nebraska

Decided February 26, 1992No. 8:CV91-00073PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM' OPINION

CAMBRIDGE, District Judge.

THIS MATTER is before the Court on a motions by Defendant Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith to dismiss and/or to make more definite and certain (Filing No. 26). For the reasons set out below, the Court finds that the motion to dismiss should be granted as to the plaintiff’s claims involving state and federal securities laws (the First, Second, Fourth and Fifth Claims) and as to the plaintiff’s claim involving the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act' (“RICO”) (the Third Claim); the motion will be denied as to the plaintiff’s claim…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Reves v. Ernst & YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  3. Clarence E. Bennett v. Kenneth Berg, Dan R. Sandford, Jr. v. Kenneth BergCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1982
  4. Clarence E. Bennett v. Kenneth Berg, Dan R. Sandford, Jr. v. Kenneth BergCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1983
  5. B.F. Hirsch v. Enright Refining Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Gunderson v. ADM Investor Services, Inc.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 2000
  2. Davies v. Genesis Medical CenterDistrict Court, S.D. Iowa · 1998
  3. Gervase v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  4. Gunderson v. ADM Investor Services, Inc.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 1999
  5. Eagle Trim, Inc. v. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2002

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API