FRIEDMAN

v.

HALL ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (18 total)

• Lampf v. Gilbertson, 501 U.S. 350 (U.S. 1991)
  …s § 20A. See Ceres Partners, supra; Short v. Belleville Shoe Mfg. Co., 908 F. 2d 1385 (CA7 1990), cert. pending, No. 90-526; In re Data Access Systems Securities Litigation, 843 F. 2d 1537 (CA3), cert. denied sub nom. Vitiello v. I. Kahlowsky & Co., 488 U. S. 849 (1988). Necessarily, we that state-law fraud provides the closest analogy to § 10(b). The analytical framework we adopt above makes consideration of state-law alternatives unnecessary where Congress has provided an express limitations period for co…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Ceres P'rs v. GEL Assocs., 918 F.2d 349 (2d Cir. 1990)
  …hat would be used in New Jersey as the state of the plaintiff’s residence, and that a court sitting in New Jersey would be required by In re Data Access Systems Securities Litigation, 843 F. 2d 1537 (3d Cir.) (en banc) {“Data Access”), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 849, 109 S.Ct. 131, 102 L.Ed.2d 103 (1988), to rule 1934 Act claims barred if not asserted within one year of their discovery, but in no event more than three years after their accrual (the “one-year/three-year” period). Defendants argued, alternative…
• Bath v. Bushkin, 913 F.2d 817 (10th Cir. 1990)
  …in determining that plaintiffs’ alleged violations of Rule 10b-5 (17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5 (1989)) were time-barred based on a federal limitations period as stated in In re Data Access Sys. Sec. Litig., 843 F. 2d 1537 (3d Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 849, 109 S.Ct. 131, 102 L.Ed.2d 103 (1988)? 2. Does a private right of action exist under § 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. § 77q(a)? 3. When does a cause of action accrue for claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizati…