Legal Opinion
Vaughan S. Newcome v. A. Jack Esrey Shearson Lehman Brothers, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided December 16, 1988No. 87-1603PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SPROUSE, Circuit Judge:
Vaughan S. Newcome appeals the district court’s dismissal of her securities fraud action against A. Jack Esrey and Shearson Lehman Brothers, Inc. (the brokers). Newcome based her federal claims on section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. § 77q(a), as well as section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), and the corresponding Securities Exchange Commission regulation, rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5. She also included pendent Virginia state-law claims. The district court first found that section 17(a) provides by implication…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Cannon v. University of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug StoresSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Cozzarelli v. Inspire Pharmaceuticals Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2008
- Maldonado v. DominguezCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
- Craighead v. E.F. Hutton & Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- Mario Ronzani v. Sanofi S.A., Sanofi Incorporated, and Arnhold and S. Bleichroeder, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. Charles W. Steadman, (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1992
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.