Legal Opinion
Denney v. Jenkens & Gilchrist
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided April 30, 2004No. 03 Civ. 5460(SAS)PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
SCHEINDLIN, District Judge.
Plaintiffs allege in this putative class action that defendants violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1962, and are liable for damages and other relief arising from unjust enrichment, breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, breach of fiduciary duties, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, professional malpractice, “unethical, excessive and illegal fees,” and conspiracy. 1 The BDO Defendants, Pasquale Defendants, and Deutsche Bank Defendants now move to compel arbitration.
1. FACTS
A.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Genesco, Inc. v. T. Kakiuchi & Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
- Gillman v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N. A.New York Court of Appeals · 1988
- Collins & Aikman Products Co. v. Building Systems, Inc. And U.S. Commercial Floor SystemCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- United States v. BDO Seidman, LLPCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007
- Denney v. BDO Seidman, L.L.P.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
- Miron v. BDO Seidman, LLPDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2004
- Denney v. Jenkens & GilchristDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2004
- Denney v. Jenkens & GilchristDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2005
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.