TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,112 Morton Globus v. Law Research Service, Inc

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,112 Morton Globus v. Law Research Service, Inc. And Ellias C. Hoppenfeld, Blair & Co., Granbery, Marache, Incorporated, and Third-Party v. Paul Wiener, Third-Party

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,112 Morton Globus v. Law Research Serv., Inc., 442 F.2d 1346 (2d Cir. 1971)
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
June 14, 1971
Docket
No. 35645
Citations
442 F.2d 1346

Opinion

442 F.2d 1346

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,112 Morton GLOBUS et al., Plaintiffs, v. LAW RESEARCH SERVICE, INC. and Ellias C. Hoppenfeld, Defendants-Appellants. BLAIR & CO., Granbery, Marache, Incorporated, Defendant-appellee and Third-Party Plaintiff, v. Paul WIENER, Third-Party Defendant.

No. 861, Docket 35645.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued June 14, 1971. Decided June 14, 1971.

Alfred S. Julien, New York City (Julien, Glaser & Blitz, New York City), for defendants-appellants Law Research Service, Inc. and Ellias C. Hoppenfeld.

Milton Black, New York City (Thomas R. Esposito, Mudge, Rose, Guthrie & Alexander, New York City, of counsel), for defendant-appellee.

Before MOORE and KAUFMAN, Circuit Judges, and TIMBERS, District judge. 1

PER CURIAM:

1

We affirmed in open court Judge Marvin E. Frankel's award to Blair & Co., Granbery, Marache, Inc. (Blair) of contribution in the amount of one-third each from Law Research Service, Inc. (LRS) and Ellias C. Hoppenfeld (Hoppenfeld), Blair's co-defendants in an earlier stage of these proceedings.

2

In Globus v. Law Research Service, 3

In Globus v. Law Research Service, Inc., 418 F.2d 1276 (1969), we affirmed a judgment entered against Blair, LRS, and Hoppenfeld for their joint and several liability pursuant to 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. 77q(a) and 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78j(b) for failing to disclose material facts in connection with a public offering of the stock of LRS. 287 F.Supp. 188 (D.C.1968). Blair subsequently satisfied the judgment and by a motion in the district court sought to compel LRS and Hoppenfeld to pay their pro-rata shares of the judgment.

4

Judge Frankel awarded contribution. We agree with both his result and reasoning and affirm the judgment on the basis of his opinion, reported at 318 F.Supp. 955 (1970).

1

Chief Judge of the District of Connecticut, sitting by designation

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1979: 119792026peak 1979 · 1

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 3

DepthCaseCited by
Globus v. Law Research Serv., Inc., 418 F.2d 1276 (2d Cir. 1969) 222
Globus, Inc. v. Law Research Serv., Inc., 318 F. Supp. 955 (S.D.N.Y. 1970) 60
Globus v. Law Research Serv., Inc., 287 F. Supp. 188 (S.D.N.Y. 1968) 34

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