Roberts v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., Inc. (1986)

green · 44 citation events across 11 courts. Showing the 14 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).

All Yellow 1 Green 13

Treatment trajectory · 1987 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then

198720062026

Sort: By significance · Most recent

yellow Dufoe v. DraftKings Inc. (2024)

But See · D. Mass. · signal: but see

Kan. 2001) (citing Landry, 473 F.2d at 368 n.1, as “in the clear minority” of courts that “have recognized a private cause of action under section 15); but see Roberts v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., 653 F. Supp. 406, 415 (D.

concluding no private right of action exists under § 15(c)(1)

green Harold ASCH, Appellant, v. PHILIPS, APPEL & WALDEN, INC., and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., Ap… (1989)

Rule Authority · 2d Cir.

Hutton Inc., 695 F.Supp. 138, 147 (S.D.N.Y.1988); Roberts v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., 653 F.Supp. 406, 413-15 (D.Mass.1986); Corbey v. Grace, 605 F.Supp. 247, 250-51 (D.Minn.1985); Pierson v. Dean, Witter, Reynolds, Inc., 551 F.Supp. 497, 502-03 (C.D.Ill.1982).

green Winer v. Patterson (1987)

Rule Authority · D.N.H. · 4 citations in this opinion

Id. at 412.

green Filloramo v. Johnston, Lemon & Co., Inc. (1988)

Rule Authority · D.D.C. · 2 citations in this opinion

This overly restrictive view of RICO has likewise been justifiably criticized; not only is it sometimes difficult to determine whether particular activities constitute a single scheme or episode in the first place, see Roberts v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., 653 F.Supp. 406, 411 (D.Mass.1986), but such a view is logically inconsistent with the statute itself.

green Bandas v. Citizens State Bank of Silver Lake (1987)

Rule Authority · Minn. Ct. App. · 2 citations in this opinion

See U.S. v. Ianniello, 808 F.2d 184 , 192 (2nd Cir.1986), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 107 S.Ct. 3229 , 97 L.Ed.2d 736 (1987); Lawaetz v. Bank of Nova Scotia, 653 F.Supp. 1278, 1287 (D.V.I.1987); Roberts v. Smith Barney, Harris, Upham & Co., Inc., 653 F.Supp. 406, 411 (D.Mass.1986); Louisiana Power & Light Company v. United Gas Pipe Line Company, 642 F.Supp. 781, 809 (E.D.La.1986).

green Doelger v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (2024)

Rule Authority · D. Mass.

See Elite Parfums, Ltd. v. Rivera, 872 F. Supp. 1269, 1273 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) (rejecting the argument that the defendant had no time to consult a lawyer or get the agreement translated when the plaintiff’s representative told the defendant that he only had a “few hours” to sign); Roberts v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., 653 F. Supp. 406, 418 (D.

finding that failure “to inform [plaintiffs] of their legal rights or to tell them to consult an attorney” were insufficient allegations to establish an unconscionable procedural defect in the formation of the contract

green Snyder v. Newhard, Cook & Co., Inc. (1991)

Rule Authority · D. Colo.

See SEC v. Seaboard Corp. (Admiralty Fund v. Hugh Johnson & Co. Inc.), 677 F.2d at 1314 n. 16; Roberts v. Smith Barney, Harris, Upham & Co., Inc., 653 F.Supp. 406, 413-15 (D.Mass.1986); Baum v. Phillips, Appel & Walden, Inc., 648 F.Supp. 1518, 1528-29 (S.D.N.Y.1986), aff'd sub nom., Asch v. Phillips, Appel & Walden, Inc., 867 F.2d 776 (2nd Cir.1989).

green Framingham Union Hospital, Inc. v. Travelers Insurance (1989)

Rule Authority · D. Mass.

See, e.g., Roeder, supra; Roberts v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., Inc., 653 F.Supp. 406, 413 (D.Mass.1986).

green Howard v. Cycare Systems, Inc. (1989)

Rule Authority · D. Mass.

In view of the sufficiency of the breach of contract claim which arises out of the same set of circumstances, it can hardly be said that the fraud claim is a pretext to discovering a wrong or that the fraud claim is being used as a “strike suit.” Roberts v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham Co., Inc., 653 F.Supp. 406, 415-16 (D.Mass., 1986).

green Nichols v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith (1989)

Rule Authority · M.D. Tenn.

“This approach has been critized as ignoring the Supreme Court’s language in Sedima to the effect that it is Congress’ intent that RICO should reach only continuous criminal activity.” Winer, 663 F.Supp. at 723 (citing for example, Roberts v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., Inc., 653 F.Supp. 406, 410-11 (D.Mass.1986)).

green Fleet Credit Corp. v. Sion (1988)

Rule Authority · D.R.I.

Roberts, 653 F.Supp. at 412 (no RICO pattern found where acts occurred during a span of 22 months); Winer, 663 F.Supp. at 726 (no RICO pattern found where acts occurred during a span of five years); Zahra v. Charles, 639 F.Supp. 1405 at 1406-09 (E.D.Mich.1986) (no RICO pattern found where acts occurred during a span of seven years).

no RICO pattern found where acts occurred during a span of 22 months

green Norman v. Brown, Todd & Heyburn (1988)

Rule Authority · D. Mass.

Roberts v. Smith Barney Harris Upham & Co., Inc., 653 F.Supp. 406, 409-413 (D.Mass.1986).

green Brick v. JC Bradford & Co., Inc. (1987)

Rule Authority · D.D.C.

Hanson Disc, Ltd., 583 F.2d 68, 71-72 (2d Cir.1978); Roberts v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., 653 F.Supp. 406, 416-17 (D.Mass.1986); Shotto, 632 F.Supp. at 522 ; Finkle & Ross, 622 F.Supp. at 1511 .

green King v. E.F. Hutton & Co. (1987)

Rule Authority · D.D.C.

See also Torwest DBC, Inc. v. Dick, 810 F.2d 925, 928-29 (10th Cir.1987); Roberts v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co., Inc., 653 F.Supp. 406, 412 (D.Mass.1986) (Among the factors to be considered in deciding whether plaintiffs can establish continuing racketeering activity by Smith Barney are the number of independent victims of the alleged activity).