green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
9.5 score
“general principals of equity suggest that only those who have pursued their own interest with care and good faith should qualify for the judicially created private 10b-5 remedies”
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 43 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Teamsters Local 282 Pension Trust Fund v. Anthony G. Angelos
We therefore concluded in Sundstrand Cory. v. Sun Chemical Cory., 553 F.2d 1033, 1040 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 875 , 98 S.Ct. 224 , 54 L.Ed.2d 155 (1977), that in a case under Rule 10b-5 the defense of the buyer’s “failure to exercise due care or diligence ... is not available in an intentional fraud case.” *529 See also Competitive Associates, Inc. v. Krekstein, Horwath & Horwath, 516 F.2d 811 (2d Cir.1975); but cf. Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1015 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Harner v. Prudential Securities Inc.
general principals of equity suggest that only those who have pursued their own interest with care and good faith should qualify for the judicially created private 10b-5 remedies
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States Ex Rel. Brookfield Construction Co. v. Stewart
Co. v. May, 194 U.S. 267, 270 , 24 S.Ct. 638, 639 , 48 L.Ed. 971 : “* * * it must be remembered that legislatures are ultimate guardians’ of the liberties and welfare of the people in quite as great a degree as the courts.” Chief Justice Stone, when an Associate Justice, eloquently discussed this subject in his dissenting opinion in United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1, 78, 87 , 56 *98 S.Ct. 312, 325, 328, 80 L.Ed. 477 , 102 A.L.R. 914 : “ * * -* while unconstitutional exercise of power by the executive and legislative branches of the government is subject to judicial restraint, the onl…
cited
Cited "see"
Trust Company of Louisiana v. N.N.P. Inc. L.C.E. International Incorporated Lawrence R. Leal William M. Moore Reliance Capital Associates David Lloyd Grant Curtis Johnson & Gibbs Daniel M. Matheson, III M. Sheppard Strong Dennis A. Jamieson James F. Crank, and Robert H. Wyshak Robert H. Wyshak & Associates
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1019-20 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Trust Co. of Louisiana v. N.N.P. Inc.
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1019-20 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Aschinger v. Columbus Showcase Co.
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1014 (5th Cir.) (“general principles of equity suggest that only those who have pursued their own interests with care and good faith should qualify for the judicially created private 10b-5 remedies”), cert, denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977). 7 In the present case, it was not reasonable for plaintiff to assume that defendant’s statement represented an unchangeable prediction of the value of the stock in the coming years.
discussed
Cited "see"
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,267 Ralph E. Aschinger v. Columbus Showcase Company, Carl J. Aschinger, Sr.
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1014 (5th Cir.) ("general principles of equity suggest that only those who have pursued their own interests with care and good faith should qualify for the judicially created private 10b-5 remedies"), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977). 7 In the present case, it was not reasonable for plaintiff to assume that defendant's statement represented an unchangeable prediction of the value of the stock in the coming years.
discussed
Cited "see"
John F. Pidcock v. Sunnyland America, Inc.
Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United States, 406 U.S. 128, 155 , 92 S.Ct. 1456, 1473 , 31 L.Ed.2d 741 (1972); see Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1024-25 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Shores v. Sklar
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1014 (5th Cir.) (plaintiff must prove reliance on defendant’s misrepresentation to recover under 10b-5), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Shores v. Sklar
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1014 (5th Cir.) (plaintiff must prove reliance on defendant's misrepresentation to recover under 10b-5), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Sterling & Esther Jensen v. George M. Snellings, III & Snellings, Breard, Sartor, Inabnett & Trascher, Defendants-Third Party Granada Corp. v. Appalachian Insurance Co., Third Party
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005 , 1023 n. 31 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977); and Vigman v. Community Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 635 F.2d 455, 459-60 (5th Cir.1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Jensen v. Snellings
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005 , 1023 n. 31 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977); and Vigman v. Community Nat’l Bank & Trust Co., 635 F.2d 455, 459-60 (5th Cir.1981).
cited
Cited "see"
James v. Nico Energy Corp.
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1025 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
James v. Nico Energy Corp.
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1025 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977). 22 Thus in the case before us, the rationale for determining injury under the disgorgement rubric will not benefit James.
cited
Cited "see"
In Re the Complaint of American Export Lines, Inc.
See Ruskay v. Waddell, 552 F.2d 392, 395-396 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Klock v. Lehman Brothers Kuhn Loeb Inc.
"Churning" has been said to occur "when a securities dealer abuses his customer's confidence for personal gain (e.g. to create commissions) by inducing transactions in the customer's account which are disproportionate to the size and character of the account.” Newburger, Loeb & Co., Inc. v. Gross, 563 F.2d 1057, 1069 (2d Cir.1977), cert, denied, 434 U.S. 1035 , 98 S.Ct. 769 , 54 L.Ed.2d 782 (1978); see abo Ruskay v. Waddell, 552 F.2d 392 , 393 n. 2 (2d Cir.1977) cert, denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 99,685 Betty Jane Siebel, of the Estate of Eldon K. Siebel, Deceased, Cross-Appellees v. James C. Scott, Cross-Appellants
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1014 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Runyan v. NCR Corp.
See City of Cleveland v. Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co., 538 F.Supp. 1287, 1289 (N.D.Ohio 1980), citing, Ruskay v. Waddell, 552 F.2d 392, 395-96 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977); American Commercial Lines, Inc. v. Valley Line Co., 529 F.2d 921, 925 (8th Cir.1976); In re Independent Gasoline Antitrust Litigation, 79 F.R.D. 552 , 559 n. 6 (D.Md.1978); Grand Motors, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 564 F.Supp. 34, 42 (W.D.Mo.1982).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fallani v. American Water Corp.
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977); Hendrickson v. Westland Mineral Corp., 463 F.Supp. 826, 829 (S.D.Fla.1978) (Gonzalez, J.).
cited
Cited "see"
Friedlander v. Nims
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1020 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Blue Sky L. Rep. P 71,767, Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,823 Dr. W. B. Landry, Bryan Zeringue and Curtis Chauvin, Cross-Appellees v. All American Assurance Company, Republic Securities Corp., Defendants-Third-Party v. Bank of St. Charles & Trust Company, Third-Party Cross-Appellants
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005 , 1024 n.31 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Landry v. All American Assurance Co.
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005 , 1024 n.31 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Fund of Funds, Ltd. v. Arthur Andersen & Co.
See generally Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1013-24 (5th Cir.), cert, denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dekro v. Stern Bros. & Co.
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See generally Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1014 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977); 37 Am.Jur.2d Fraud & Deceit § 12 (1968).
cited
Cited "see"
LTV Federal Credit Union v. UMIC Government Securities, Inc.
See DuPuy v. DuPuy, 551 F.2d 1005 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
examined
Cited "see"
Blue Sky L. Rep. P 71,642, Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,919, 8 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 61 Ralph E. Huddleston and Chester E. Bradley, Jr., Individually and as Designated Class Representatives v. Herman & MacLean Etc., Herman & MacLean Certified Public Accountants, a Partnership, and Lawrence A. Lopatin, Leslie Share
(3×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1024 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
examined
Cited "see"
Huddleston v. Herman & MacLean
(3×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1024 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,601 J. H. Cohn & Co. Self-Employment Retirement Trust, Plaintiffs v. American Appraisal Associates, Inc., the Evergreen Fund Inc., on Its Own Behalf and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Hon. Robert W. Warren, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1013-20 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977); Sunstrand Corp. v. Sun Chemical Corp., 553 F.2d at 1044 ; Note, Reliance and Private 10b-5 Actions, 88 Harv.L.Rev. 584, 602-06 (1975); Comment, A reevaluation of the Due Diligence Requirement for Plaintiffs in Private Actions Under SEC Rule 10b-5, 1978 Wis.L.Rev. 904; but see Holdsworth v. Strong, 545 F.2d 687 (10th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 955 , 97 S.Ct. 1600 , 51 L.Ed.2d 805 (1977) 5 There do not appear to be any cases in which a court of appeals issued the writ…
discussed
Cited "see"
J. H. Cohn & Co. Self-Employment Retirement Trust v. American Appraisal Associates, Inc.
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1013-20 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977); Sunstrand Corp. v. Sun Chemical Corp., 553 F.2d at 1044 ; Note, Reliance and Private 10b-5 Actions, 88 Harv.L.Rev. 584, 602 -06 (1975); Comment, A reevaluation of the Due Diligence Requirement for Plaintiffs in Private Actions Under SEC Rule 10b-5, 1978 Wis.L.Rev. 904; but see Holdsworth v. Strong, 545 F.2d 687 (10th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 955 , 97 S.Ct. 1600 , 51 L.Ed.2d 805 (1977). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Mallis v. Bankers Trust Co.
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1013-24 (5 Cir.) (Wisdom, J.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977) with Mr. Justice White dissenting from the denial on the ground that the standard announced in Dupuy differed from our statement in Hirsch v. du Pont, infra; Sunstrand Corp. v. Sun Chemical Corp., 553 F.2d 1033, 1048-49 (7 Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 875 , 98 S.Ct. 225 , 54 L.Ed.2d 155 (1977); Holdsworth v. Strong, 545 F.2d 687, 692-95 (10 Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 955 , 97 S.Ct. 1600 , 51 L.Ed.2d 805 (1977); Straub v. Vaisman & Co., 540 F.2d 591, 596-9…
discussed
Cited "see"
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,262 Samuel Mallis and Franklyn Kupferman v. Bankers Trust Co., and Third Party v. Jerome B. Kates, Third Party and Jack J. Arnold, Third Party
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1013-24 (5 Cir.) (Wisdom, J.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977) with Mr. Justice White dissenting from the denial on the ground that the standard announced in Dupuy differed from our statement in Hirsch v. du Pont, infra; Sunstrand Corp. v. Sun Chemical Corp., 553 F.2d 1033, 1048-49 (7 Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 875 , 98 S.Ct. 225 , 54 L.Ed.2d 155 (1977); Holdsworth v. Strong, 545 F.2d 687, 692-95 (10 Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 955 , 97 S.Ct. 1600 , 51 L.Ed.2d 805 (1977); Straub v. Vaisman & Co., 540 F.2d 591, 596-9…
discussed
Cited "see"
Smith v. Bader
See Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977); Bridgen v. Scott, 456 F.Supp. 1048, 1062 (S.D.Tex. 1978); Houlihan v. Anderson-Stokes, Inc., 78 F.R.D. 232 , 234 n.l (D.D.C.1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Wenzel v. Patrick Petroleum Co.
As noted previously, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has indicated that imputation of constructive knowledge to a securities law plaintiff is “dependent upon the circumstances of each case.” Straub, 540 F.2d at 597 ; see also Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1016 (5th Cir.) (“diligence of the plaintiff in 10b-5 cases is judged subjectively”), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977); Dzenits v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 494 F.2d 168, 172 (10th Cir.1974) (“issue of constructive knowledge is also one of fact”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Remington Products, Inc. v. North American Philips Corp.
“In construing the scope and effect of a release, the intent manifested by the parties must govern.” Concepcion v. United States Navy, 575 F.Supp. 23, 25 (S.D.N.Y.1983); See also Ruskay v. Jensen III, 342 F.Supp. 264, 271 (S.D.N.Y.1972), affm’d sub nom, Ruskay v. Waddell, 552 F.2d 392, 395 (2d Cir.1977), cert. denied 434 *42 U.S. 911, 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Northern Oil Co. v. Standard Oil Co.
Compare Chase Securities Corp. v. Donaldson, 325 U.S. 304, 314-16 , 65 S.Ct. 1137, 1142-43 , 89 L.Ed. 1628 (reflecting willingness to permit impact of statutes of limitation to be restricted), reh'g denied, 325 U.S. 896 , 65 S.Ct. 1561 , 89 L.Ed. 2006 (1945) with Locafrance U.S. Corp. v. Intermodal Systems Leasing, Inc., 558 F.2d at 1115 (encouraging enforcement of releases made in commercial context where language of release is clear), and Ruskay v. Waddell, 552 F.2d 392, 398 (2d Cir.) ("strong policy considerations require that what all parties thought to be a closed matter [by virtue of a g…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Western Federal Corp. v. Davis
See also Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977); Smith v. Bader, 83 F.R.D. 437 (S.D.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dura-Bilt Corp. v. Chase Manhattan Corp.
(2×)
Compare Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1014-20 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977) (plaintiff may recover unless reckless in not investigating “in disregard of a risk known to him or so obvious that he must be taken to be aware of it, and so great as to make it highly probable that harm would follow”); and Holmes v. Bateson, 583 F.2d 542 , 559 & n.21 (1st Cir. 1978) (same) with Holdsworth v. Strong, 545 F.2d 687, 693 (10th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 955 , 97 S.Ct. 1600 , 51 L.Ed.2d 805 (1977) (plaintiff’s lack of due diligence no bar to a…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
American General Insurance v. Equitable General Corp.
Compare Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005, 1014-20 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977) (plaintiff may recover unless reckless in not investigating “in disregard of a risk known to him or so obvious that he must be taken to [be] aware of it, and so great as to make it highly probable that harm would follow”), with Holdsworth v. Strong, 545 F.2d 687, 693 (10th Cir. 1976) cert. denied, 430 U.S. 955 , 97 S.Ct. 1600 , 51 L.Ed.2d 805 (1977) (plaintiff’s lack of due diligence no bar to action after Hochfelder unless plaintiff’s actions constituted “gros…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,326 David Broad v. Rockwell International Corporation
See also Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Roberts v. Magnetic Metals Co.
Compare Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005 , 1023-24 n.31 (5th Cir.) (makes no difference), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977), with Toledo Trust Co. v. Nye, 392 F.Supp. 484, 490-91 (N.D.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Roberts v. Magnetic Metals Company
Compare Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005 , 1023-24 n.31 (5th Cir.) (makes no difference), Cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977), With Toledo Trust Co. v. Nye, 392 F.Supp. 484, 490-91 (N.D.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Morris v. Stifel, Nicolaus & Co.
See also Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005 , 1023-24 n. 31 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977); LaRosa Building Corp. v. The Equitable Life Assurance Society, 542 F.2d 990 (7th Cir. 1976) (applying Indiana blue sky law); Colonial Bank & Trust v. American Bankshares Corp., 442 F.Supp. 234 (E.D.Wis.1977) (applying Wisconsin blue sky law); Reid v. Madison, 438 F.Supp. 332 (E.D.Va.1977) (applying Virginia blue sky law); Dirksen v. Hynes & Howes Insurance Counselors, Inc., 423 F.Supp. 1290 (S.D.Iowa 1976) (applying Iowa blue sky law).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,895 Margaret Morris v. Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc., and Kingsley O. Wright, Sr., Mary A. Braun v. Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc., Kingsley O. Wright, and Theodore Menas
See also Dupuy v. Dupuy, 551 F.2d 1005 , 1023-24 n. 31 (5th Cir.), Cert. denied, 434 U.S. 911 , 98 S.Ct. 312 , 54 L.Ed.2d 197 (1977); LaRosa Building Corp. v. The Equitable Life Assurance Society, 542 F.2d 990 (7th Cir. 1976) (applying Indiana blue sky law); Colonial Bank & Trust v. American Bankshares Corp., 442 F.Supp. 234 (E.D.Wis.1977) (applying Wisconsin blue sky law); Reid v. Madison, 438 F.Supp. 332 (E.D.Va.1977) (applying Virginia blue sky law); Dirksen v. Hynes & Howes Insurance Counselors, Inc., 423 F.Supp. 1290 (S.D.Iowa 1976) (applying Iowa blue sky law). 28 Two Sixth Circuit cases…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ruskay
v.
Waddell
v.
Waddell
No. 77-119.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 17, 1977.
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.