Legal Opinion
State of Ohio v. Peterson, Lowry, Rall, Barber & Ross
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided May 26, 1981No. 79-1762PublishedCited by 125 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PALMIERI, District Judge.
The State of Ohio appeals from a summary judgment dismissing its action in securities fraud as barred by the statute of limitations. Ohio brought this action under § 20 and § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 1 against Peterson, Lowry, Rail, Barber & Ross, a Chicago law firm, and Timothy G. Lowry, a former member of that firm, on October 7, 1976 in the District of Colorado. The district court found, in a thorough opinion, after permitting Ohio to amend its complaint and after a full opportunity for discovery had been afforded the parties, 2 that the…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Holmberg v. ArmbrechtSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Curtis v. LoetherSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Board of Regents of Univ. of State of NY v. TomanioSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Ross v. BernhardSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by125 opinions
- Riley v. PresnellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
- Jensen v. SnellingsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1988
- Keating v. CareyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
- Maughan v. SW Servicing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1985
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,722 Securities and Exchange Commission v. The Seaboard Corporation, Etc., Admiralty Fund and Admiralty Fund Growth Series Litigation Trust, Cross-Claimant/appellant v. Hugh Johnson & Company, Inc., Hugh Johnson, Norman Michael Keiser, and Ernst& Ernst, Cross-Defendants/appelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
120 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.