SOIFER

v.

BANKERS TRUST CO. ET AL.; AND RHOADES ET AL. V. BANKERS TRUST CO. ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (19 total)

• Holmes v. Sec. Inv. Prot. Corp., 503 U.S. 258 (U.S. 1992)
  …ictims of Holmes’ fraud. See Brief for Respondent 39, n. 185 (citing Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Arnett, 875 F. 2d 1271, 1280 (CA7 1989); Ocean Energy, 868 F. 2d, at 744-747; Bankers Trust Co. v. Rhoades, 859 F. 2d 1096, 1100-1101 (CA2 1988), cert. denied, 490 U. S. 1007 (1989)). While that may well be true, since SIPC does not claim subrogation to the rights of the customers that purchased manipulated securities, see supra, at 270-271, it gains nothing by the point. We further note that SIPC alleged in the courts…
• Klehr et ux. v. A. O. Smith Corp., 521 U.S. 179 (U.S. 1997)
  …y granted, 519 U. S. 233 (1997); McCool v. Strata Oil Co., 972 F. 2d 1452, 1464-1465 (CA7 1992); Rodriguez v. Banco Central Corp., 917 [*186] F. 2d 664, 665-666 (CA1 1990); Bankers Trust Co. v. Rhoades, 859 F. 2d 1096, 1102 (CA2 1988), cert. denied, 490 U. S. 1007 (1989); Pocahontas Supreme Coal Co. v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 828 F. 2d 211, 220 (CA4 1987); see also Riddell v. Riddell Washington Corp., 866 F. 2d 1480, 1489-1490 (CADC 1989) (assuming, but not deciding, that injury discovery rule applies). One…
• Cruden v. The Bank OF NEW York, 957 F.2d 961 (2d Cir. 1992)
  …g the corporate veil and successor liability claims were based on the fraudulent transfers, and (d) dismissed plaintiffs’ RICO claims as time-barred based upon our holding in Bankers Trust Co. v. Rhoades, 859 F. 2d 1096 (2d Cir.1988), certs. denied, 490 U.S. 1007, 109 S.Ct. 1642, 104 L.Ed.2d 158 (1989). We discuss each of these rulings in turn. A. Fraud Claims Against National & Townsend The first challenge is to the dismissal of the fraud claims against National and Townsend (Counts V & VI). We think New…