TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 92,849 Ernest Klein v. Walston & Co., Inc.

Ernest KLEIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WALSTON & CO., Inc., Defendant-Appellee

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 92,849 Ernest Klein v. Walston & Co., 432 F.2d 936 (2d Cir. 1970)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
October 29, 1970
Docket
Nos. 142, Docket 34735
Judges
Moore, Friendly, Adams
Citations
432 F.2d 9361970 U.S. App. LEXIS 6707

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff’s complaint, filed in the District Court for the Eastern District of *937 New York in 1969, sought damages in connection with securities transactions in 1959, with respect to which defendant had secured a judgment in the Supreme Court of New York for New York County in 1961. The complaint alleged claims based on contract and fraud, and also under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The common law claims had been alleged in an action brought by plaintiff in 1964 in the Supreme Court for Kings County, which was pending undetermined. On defendant’s motion Judge Bartels entered an order staying proceedings in the federal action until final determination of this state action.

The order was well within the judge’s discretion. See Mottolese v. Kaufman, 176 F.2d 301 (2 Cir. 1949). While because of the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts to enforce the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, § 27, the state court will not be able to determine certain claims asserted in the federal suit but not advanced in the state action, it can authoritatively determine the common law claims and perhaps also defenses such as res adjudicata and the statute of limitations that may be dispositive of the 1934 Act claims as well. Particularly in these days of congested calendars the judge was amply justified in not allowing litigation of these hoary claims to occupy the energies of two courts at the same time.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 37 cases

View all citing references →
1971: 51972: 41973: 31974: 11975: 31976: 21978: 11979: 21980: 11981: 41982: 31985: 21986: 11987: 11988: 11990: 11998: 12020: 119712026peak 1971 · 5

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Weisfeld v. Spartans Industries, Inc.58 F.R.D. 570 (S.D.N.Y. 1972)
  2. Miriam G. Carroll v. City of Mount Clemens, John Beeding, Jr., Harry Diehl, Jolyne Fisher, and Rex A. Burgess139 F.3d 1072 (6th Cir. 1998)
  3. Giulini v. Blessing654 F.2d 189 (2d Cir. 1981)
  4. Kamerman v. Steinberg681 F. Supp. 206 (S.D.N.Y. 1988)
  5. Classen v. Weller516 F. Supp. 1243 (N.D. Cal. 1981)
  6. Kohn v. American Metal Climax, Inc.458 F.2d 255 (3d Cir. 1972) · Concurring in Part, Dissenting in Part

Most recent

  1. Sports Rehab Consulting LLC v. Vail Clinic Inc.No. 1:19-cv-02075 (D. Colo. Aug. 21, 2020)
  2. Miriam G. Carroll v. City of Mount Clemens, John Beeding, Jr., Harry Diehl, Jolyne Fisher, and Rex A. Burgess139 F.3d 1072 (6th Cir. 1998)
  3. Lorentzen v. Levolor Corp.754 F. Supp. 987 (S.D.N.Y. 1990)
  4. Kamerman v. Steinberg681 F. Supp. 206 (S.D.N.Y. 1988)
  5. Rose v. Village of Upper Nyack, NY669 F. Supp. 654 (S.D.N.Y. 1987)
  6. Town of Warwick v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection647 F. Supp. 1322 (S.D.N.Y. 1986)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Mottolese v. Kaufman, 176 F.2d 301 (2d Cir. 1949) 91

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list