Legal Opinion
GRUNTAL & CO., LLC v. Maharaj
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided September 8, 1998No. 98 Civ. 6078Published
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
RAKOFF, District Judge.
A district court’s authority to interfere with an ongoing securities arbitration is severely limited, as this case illustrates.
On August 26, 1998, plaintiff Gruntal & Co., L.L.C. (“Gruntal”) applied to the Court for a temporary restraining order staying a hearing scheduled for September 3, 1998 before an arbitration panel of the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (“NASD”) in a matter styled Ramnarace Maharaj and Parbatie Maharaj v. Gruntal & Co., Inc. and David Rajpatty, NASD Case No. 97-05852. In the absence of the Honorable Lewis A.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- In the Matter of the Arbitration Between Tempo Shain Corporation Neptune Plus Corporation v. Bertek, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
- Folkways Music Publishers, Inc. v. George David Weiss, June Peretti, Luigi Creatore and Abilene Music Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- Storey v. Searle Blatt Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1988
- American Express Financial Advisors Inc. v. ThorleyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998