Legal Opinion

Securities & Exchange Commission v. O'Hagan

District Court, D. Minnesota

Decided August 8, 1995No. Civ. 3-90-16PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

RENNER, Senior District Judge.

INTRODUCTION

Before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. The plaintiff, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), brings this action for disgorgement and permanent injunction based upon the collateral estoppel effect of defendant James O’Hagan’s prior criminal conviction for securities fraud. O’Hagan moves for summary judgment on the grounds that the SEC’s civil action is barred by the Fifth Amendment Double Jeopardy Clause, merger and res judicata, and that the Supreme Court decision in Central Bank, of…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. Green v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  5. United States v. HalperSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Securities & Exchange Commission v. SargentCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2003
  2. Bryant v. Lynch (In Re Lynch)District Court, District of Columbia · 2004
  3. Securities & Exchange Commission v. Capital Solutions Monthly Income Fund, LPDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2014
  4. Securities & Exchange Commission v. HappDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2003
  5. Securities & Exchange Commission v. True North Finance Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2012

4 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