Legal Opinion
Morin v. Trupin
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided October 8, 1993No. 88 Civ. 5743 (RWS), 90 Civ. 3475 (RWS)PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SWEET, District Judge.
Plaintiffs in the matter of Alberti v. Trupin (the “Alberti Plaintiffs”) have moved pursuant to Rule 15, Fed.R.Civ.P., for leave to amend their Third Amended Complaint and to file a Fourth Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs in the related action of Morin v. Trupin (the “Morin Plaintiffs”), by the same motion, request the Court to grant them leave to amend their Third Amended Complaint. By these amendments, the Plaintiffs seek, among other things, to plead claims for relief under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) against Frederick Mintz, Alan…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- H. J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Reves v. Ernst & YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Department of Economic Development v. Arthur Andersen & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Schmidt v. Fleet BankDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
- Mathon v. Marine Midland Bank, N.A.District Court, E.D. New York · 1995
- Warnaco Inc. v. VF Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1994
- Madanes v. MadanesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1997
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.