Morris v. Cantor (1975)
green
· 23 citation events
across 8 courts.
Showing the 8 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1976 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
197620012026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Retirement Board v. BNYM (2014)
See 15 U.S.C. § 77bbb; Morris v. Cantor, 390 F. Supp. 817, 820 (S.D.N.Y. 1975); 6 Thomas Lee Hazen, Treatise on the Law of Securities Regulation § 19.1, at 468‐70 (6th ed. 2009).
See 15 U.S.C. § 77bbb; Morris v. Cantor, 390 F.Supp. 817, 820 (S.D.N.Y.1975); 6 Thomas Lee Hazen, Treatise on the Law of Securities Regulation § 19.1, at 468-70 (6th ed.2009).
green
In Re Grant Company (1983)
See also United States Trust Co. v. First National City Bank, 57 A.D.2d 285, 296 , 394 N.Y.S.2d 653, 660-61 (1st Dep't 1977), aff'd, 45 N.Y.2d 869 , 410 N.Y.S.2d 580 , 382 N.E.2d 1355 (1978); Broad v. Rockwell Int'l Corp., 642 F.2d 929, 959-60 (5 Cir.) (en banc) (construing New York law), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 965 , 102 S.Ct. 506 , 70 L.Ed.2d 380 (1981); Morris v. Cantor, 390 F.Supp. 817, 824 (S.D.N.Y.1975).
green
Cosoff v. Rodman (1983)
See also United States Trust Co. v. First National City Bank, 57 A.D.2d 285, 296 , 394 N.Y.S.2d 653, 660-61 (1st Dep’t 1977), aff’d, 45 N.Y.2d 869 , 410 N.Y.S.2d 580 , 382 N.E.2d 1355 (1978); Broad v. Rockwell Int’l Corp., 642 F.2d 929, 959-60 (5 Cir.) (en banc) (construing New York law), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 965 , 102 S.Ct. 506 , 70 L.Ed.2d 380 (1981); Morris v. Cantor, 390 F.Supp. 817, 824 (S.D.N.Y.1975).
green
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,514 Zeffiro, Jay A., Individually and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situate… (1980)
Since Cort, the Supreme Court has been reluctant to imply private rights of action under the securities laws. 7 Thus, plaintiffs' argument in favor of an express private right of action is an apparent attempt to escape the perceived strictures of the Cort analysis. 14 The cornerstone of plaintiffs' first argument in favor of an express federal cause of action is the jurisdictional provision of the Act, section 322, which provides: 15 (b) Jurisdiction of offenses and violatio…
green
Zeffiro v. First Pennsylvania Banking & Trust Co. (1980)
Two cases which have considered a private right of action under the Act 9 have accepted this argument, holding that section 322 expressly confers federal jurisdiction. 10 In Morris v. Cantor, 390 F.Supp. 817, 822 (S.D.N.Y.1975), the court reasoned that the Act provided an “indirect method of imposing nationally uniform and clearly defined obligations,” and therefore the terms of the indenture were “created by” the Act and enforceable in federal court.
Litig., 416 F.Supp. 161, 203 (C.D.Cal.1976) (adopting the approach of Morris v. Cantor, infra), aff'd, 603 F.2d 1353 (9th Cir.1979); Morris v. Cantor, 390 F.Supp. 817, 822 (S.D.N.Y.1975) (deriving right to sue from jurisdictional section of TLA); see also Caplin v. Marine Midland Grace Trust Co., 406 U.S. 416 , 426 n. 17, 92 S.Ct. 1678 , 1684 n. 17, 32 L.Ed.2d 195 (1972) (suggesting that the TIA creates a private right of action, but declining to decide the issue).
green
Mintener v. Michigan National Bank (1982)
"Nothing herein contained shall affect the right of the indenture trustee— *638 "(A) to retain for its own account (i) payments made on account of any such claim by any person (other than such obligor) who is liable thereon, and (ii) the proceeds of the bona fide sale of any such claim by the trustee to a third person, and (iii) distributions made in cash, securities, or other property in respect of claims filed against such obligor in bankruptcy or receivership or in procee…