BANKERS TRUST CO.

v.

METGE, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF METGE, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• First Interstate Bank OF Denver, N.A. v. Pring, 969 F.2d 891 (10th Cir. 1992)
  …of Columbia Circuits); Metge v. Baehler, 762 F. 2d 621, 631 (8th Cir.1985) (“good faith and lack of participation are affirmative defenses in a controlling person action”), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1057, 106 S.Ct. 798, 88 L.Ed.2d 774 and cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1072, 106 S.Ct. 832, 88 L.Ed.2d 804 (1986). Thus, once a plaintiff establishes a primary violation and that the defendant is a controlling person under § 20(a), the defendant then has the burden to show that he “acted in good faith and did not directly…
• Hudson T. Harrison & Harrison Constr. Inc. v. Reynolds, 974 F.2d 873 (7th Cir. 1992)
  …formulation for the [defendant] Bank was not a ‘controlling person’ even under the less demanding Metge test.” Schlifke, 866 F. 2d at 949. In Metge v. Baehler, 762 F. 2d 621 (8th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1057, 106 S.Ct. 798, 88 L.Ed.2d 774; 474 U.S. 1072, 106 S.Ct. 832, 88 L.Ed.2d 804 (1986), the court had held: [P]laintiffs must establish, first, that the defendant lender actually participated in (i.e., exercised control over) the operations of the corporation in general; then he must prove that t…