MILLER ET AL.

v.

DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL, ALCOHOLIC CONTROL APPEALS BOARD

Citator

Cited By (14 total)

• Chaunt v. United States, 364 U.S. 350 (U.S. 1960)
  …ied sub nom. Genovese v. United States, 352 U. S. 952; United States v. humantes, 139 F. Supp. 574 (D. C. N. D. Calif.), aff’d per curiam, 232 F. 2d 216 (C. A. 9th Cir.); Stacher v. United States, 258 F. 2d 112 (C. A. 9th Cir.), cert. denied, [*358] 358 U. S. 907; United States v. Accardo, 113 F. Supp. 783 (D. C. D. N. J.), aff’d per curiam, 208 F. 2d 632 (C. A. 3d Cir.), cert. denied, 347 U. S. 952. Cf. United States v. Sweet, 106 F. Supp. 634, 635 (D. C. E. D. Mich.), aff’d per curiam, 211 F. 2d 118 (C. A.…
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Gerson Blatt, 583 F.2d 1325 (5th Cir. 1978)
  …ement the objectors expected to receive Exquisite stock of almost twice the equivalent value received by non-objectors. . Accord: Crews v. Cloncs, 432 F. 2d 1259 (7th Cir. 1970); Stacher v. United States, 258 F. 2d 112, 116 (9th Cir.), cert. denied 358 U.S. 907, 79 S.Ct. 232, 3 L.Ed.2d 228 (1958). . Rule 10b-5(2) proscribes the omission of any “material fact necessary to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading.” Materiality has been described…
• Czeremcha v. Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists & Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, 724 F.2d 1552 (11th Cir. 1984)
  …ponsive pleading for the purposes of Rule 15(a), and, therefore, even after dismissal of the complaint the plaintiff has the right to amend. See, e.g., 222 East Chestnut Street Corp. v. Lakefront Realty Corp., 256 F. 2d 513 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 907, 79 S.Ct. 232, 3 L.Ed.2d 228 (1958). The Second Circuit, however, has viewed the right to amend as dissolving upon the granting of the motion to dismiss. Elfenbein, 590 F. 2d at 448 n. 2. Our circuit has not expressly decided the issue, see McCrary…