securities violation (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

securities violation in Texas

6 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1895–2015 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Frank v. Bear, Stearns & Co.green
texapp · 2000 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2005–2011
2 sentences

2011See Frank , 11 S.W.3d at 384 .

2005See Frank v. Bear, Steams & Co., 11 S.W.3d 380, 384 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. denied) (holding that “[i]n order to establish liability” for aiding a securities violation, “a plaintiff must demonstrate ... that the alleged aider had ‘general awareness’ of its role in this violation”) (citations omitted).

22
Sterling Trust Co. v. Adderleygreen
tex · 2005 · cited in 4 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2011–2015
2 sentences

2012It concluded that a plaintiff must prove that an aider was aware of the primary violator’s improper activities before the alleged aider may be held liable for assisting in the securities violation, even when the aider is alleged to have acted with only “reckless disregard for the truth or the law.” Id.

2012It concluded that a plaintiff must prove that an aider was aware of the primary violator’s improper activities before the alleged aider may be held liable for assisting in the securities violation, even when the aider is alleged to 29 have acted with only “reckless disregard for the truth or the law.” Id.

14
Kolstad v. American Dental Assn.green
scotus · 1999 · cited in 4 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2005–2015
2 sentences

2015Id.

2012Dental Ass’n, 527 U.S. 526, 536 , 119 S.Ct. 2118, 2125 , 144 L.Ed.2d 494 (1999)).

14

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
Sterling Trust Co. v. Adderley green
texapp · 2003
2 sentences

2015However, the jury found that Sterling aided Cornelius's aider is generally aware of its role in the securities violation securities violation and that Sterling breached its fiduciary to be liable as an aider.” 119 S.W.3d at 320 .

2005The court of appeals held that the failure to include such an instruction was not error, concluding that “the TSA does not require proof that an aider is generally aware of its role in the securities violation to be liable as an aider.” 119 S.W.3d at 320 .

22005–2015
Goldstein v. Mortenson green
texapp · 2003
2 sentences

2012Relying on United States Supreme Court case law, the Texas supreme court further concluded that, “the TSA’s scienter requirement of ‘reckless disregard for the truth or the law* is similarly intended to impose a requirement of ‘recklessness in its subjective form,’ and this recklessness must be directly related to the primary violator’s securities violation.” Id. at 842 (citing Kolstad v. Am.

2012Relying on United States Supreme Court case law, the Texas supreme court further concluded that, “the TSA’s scienter requirement of ‘reckless disregard for the truth or the law’ is similarly intended to impose a requirement of ‘recklessness in its subjective form,’ and this recklessness must be directly related to the primary violator’s securities violation.” Id. at 842 (citing Kolstad v. Am.

22012–2012
United States v. Lewis F. Shelton, James Darrough, John Derry, Donald Burks, and Carl Bledsoe green
ca7 · 1982
1 sentence

2015Ponzi collected nearly $10 million in 8 months ... using the funds of new investors to pay off those whose notes had come due.” United States v. Shelton, 669 F.2d 446 , 449 n. 2 (7th Cir.1982). 2 The United States Supreme Court later held that Congress did not intend to create a private cause of action for aiding and abetting a securities violation under section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act.

12015–2015
Metge v. Baehler green
ca8 · 1985
1 sentence

2011See, e.g. , Fernea v. Merrrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith, Inc ., No. 03-09-00566-CV, 2011 WL 2769838 , at *15 (Tex. App.—Austin July 12, 2011, no pet. h.); Metge v. Baehler , 762 F.2d 621 , 630–31 (8th Cir. 1985); G.A.

12011–2011
Bomar v. West green
· 1894
1 sentence

1895Bomar v. West, 28 S. W.

11895–1895

Statutes the citing opinions construe

USC § 15u.s.c.77 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

NC 9 (1993–2021) CO 6 (1925–2018) TX 6 (1895–2015) OR 4 (1989–2015) AZ 4 (1978–2020) DE 4 (2006–2026) CA 3 (1973–2001) OK 3 (2010–2010) IN 3 (1896–2011) WA 3 (2005–2019) GA 2 (1988–1998) ND 2 (2005–2005) OH 2 (1979–1999) KS 2 (2005–2006) MA 2 (1909–2014) IL 2 (1934–1984) SC 2 (1984–2012)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check