¶1 The first-impression principal issue in these appellate proceedings is whether an action may be maintained under the Oklahoma Uniform Securities Act against innocent victims of a Ponzi scheme to force them to pay to the Department of Securities those amounts they received from the Ponzi scheme which are in excess of their investments in that scheme. We hold that the Department may proceed agai

D & J Tire Inc. (“Appellant”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Hercules Tire & Rubber Company and Lawrence B. Seawell, a Hercules officer (collectively, “Appellees”). Appellant, a former Hercules minority shareholder, sued Appellees for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of Seawell’s failure to disclose that Hercules was in talks to be acquired by Fd

The purchasers of a home (“appellants”) appeal the trial court’s order compelling arbitration in their action against the builder. The appellants assert that their personal injury claims for mold exposure are based on duties of care imposed b y common law—and not o n th e purchase agreement containing the arbitration clause—a n d therefore are not arbitrable. We find that the language in

Royce Roberts hired Walker & Associates Surveying, Inc. (WAS) and Dennis Walker (Walker) d/b/a Walker and Associates Construction (WAC) (collectively the Walker Group) to extend a horse training racetrack on his property. A dispute arose as to how to build the racetrack, workers were instructed to leave the job, and WAS filed a mechanic’s lien affidavit on Roberts’ property. WAS filed suit o

This fraud case arises out of the purchase and sale of residential properties alleged to have diminished value because they are prone to flooding. A jury returned a verdict in favor of homeowners Carl Meletio (“Meletio”), Rusty Mobley (“Mobley”), Jeff Schmitz (“Schmitz”), James Young (“Young”), Bobby White (“White”), Renee Hill (“Hill”), Jeff Milford (“Milford”), James

These appeals have their origin in a failed real estate transaction. Appellants Farrokh and Scheherezade Sharabianlou offered to purchase a commercial building owned by respondent Berenstein Associates.1 The Sharabianlous engaged real estate agent Ronald Karp and his company California Realty Investment Company (hereafter the Karps) to represent them in the transaction. Soon after the offer was ma

This appeal involves certification of a class action under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) (Civ. Code, § 1750 et seq.)1 and the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.). The action is based on defendant‟s alleged failure to disclose that the color composition of its roof tiles would erode away, leaving bare concrete, well before the end of the tiles‟ represen

Jessie Williams was a customer of Family Bank & Trust Company in Illinois. Following a Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) routine examination in late 2005, Family Bank stopped making loans to Williams, supposedly at the behest of FDIC Associate Examiner Jerry Fleming. The alleged catalyst for Fleming’s decision was a racially motivated bias against Williams and other African-Americans.

Defendants and appellants Alex Gorabi and Angelino Men‘s Wear, Inc. (defendants)1 appeal from a monetary judgment entered against them and in favor of plaintiff Sam Ghadrdan (plaintiff) after a jury trial. In the published portion of this opinion, we hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it excluded evidence of a plea agreement and conviction of a corporation, of which plai

Appellant Versai Management Corporation (Versai) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Appellees Clarendon America Insurance Company (Clarendon) and Employers Fire Insurance Co. (EFIC) on (1) Versai’s contract claims for unpaid insurance proceeds for property damage, business interruption, replacement costs, and code compliance upgrades; and (2) Versai’s claims t

In this case, we are asked to consider two issues of first impression in Kentucky: whether professional negligence claims against an insurance agent and an insurance broker are assignable ; and, if so, whether such assignment, when coupled with a settlement agreement as to damages and a covenant not to execute, is illusory or void as against public policy.

The Star of Louisville ("the Star"

In this action alleging several intentional torts, plaintiff H. Scott Dalley appeals as of right a circuit court order granting defendants summary disposition pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(8). We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

I. Facts and Underlying Proceedings

A. The Federal Case

This case finds its genesis in a dispute between an insur

In the dispositive issue in this appeal, we are asked to determine whether the statute of frauds bars a claim for appellant’s alleged breach of an agreement to purchase real property on behalf of a partnership. Because the statute of frauds applies but was not satisfied, we reverse and render judgment that appellee take nothing.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

On

In this commercial lease dispute, we determine whether a landlord may enforce a lease to operate a “nightclub or bar” and for “no other” purpose when the tenant cannot legally obtain a liquor license for the leased premises and the lease requires that any activity on the premises comply with applicable law.

After a bench trial, the trial court entered a judgment declaring the commer

In one issue, appellants, Dixon Financial Services, Ltd. (“Dixon Financial”) and Hyperdynamics Corporation (“Hyperdynamics”), contend that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment in favor of appellees, James Chang, Nick H. Johnson, Riley L. Burnett, Jr., and Johnson, Burnett & Chang, L.L.P.

We affirm.

Background Footnote

In September 1999

¶ 1 The “economic loss doctrine” bars plaintiffs, in certain circumstances, from recovering economic damages in tort. This Court has previously applied the doctrine only to products liability claims. Today we apply the doctrine in a construction defect case and hold that a property owner is limited to its contractual remedies when an architect’s negligent design causes economic loss but no

Plaintiff-appellant Operating Local 649 Annuity Trust Fund (“Local 649”) appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Pauley, J.) dismissing claims alleging securities fraud in violation of § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5, and breaches of fiduciary duty in violation of § 36(b) of the Investment Company Act of

This litigation arises out of the issuance of an allegedly false and misleading proxy solicitation for a stock option plan. Plaintiff-appellant New York City Employees’ Retirement System (“NYCERS”) alleged that the false solicitation denied it its right to an informed shareholder vote and caused it to suffer economic loss through share dilution. The district court dismissed NYCERS’ consoli

Appellants Lifeguard Benefit Services, Inc. and The Amacore Group, Inc. bring this accelerated, interlocutory appeal from the imposition of a temporary injunction (1) enjoining Appellants from denying Appellees Direct Medical Network Solutions, Inc. (ADirectMed@) and Consumer Assistance Services Association (ACASA@) access to and possession of data and information regarding Appellees= members and

Havensure, L.L.C. (Havensure), an insurance broker, sued Prudential Insurance Company of America (Prudential), an insurer, for tortious interference with Havensure’s business relationship with York International Corp. (York).

Havensure claimed that Prudential offered York a better rate quote through Havensure’s competitor than relationship with York International Corp. (York). The part

John Dubinsky, William Stern, Alvin Siteman, Eldon Schoenberg, David Rasch, and Jack Cregan (“Subordinate Bondholders”) invested in a refinancing venture for a real estate development.

They sued the developer of the project, Mermart, L.L.C. (“Mermart”), alleging breach of contract and demanding equitable 2The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, United States District Judge for the Eastern

W.T. Paine appeals the district court’s2 dismissal on summary judgment of his lawsuit against Jefferson National Life Insurance Company (“Jefferson”)3 and Protective Life Insurance Company (“Protective”)4 on the ground that Paine’s claims are barred by limitations.

Paine also appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to file a second amended complaint. We affirm.
<

In August 2006, plaintiff Joseph Griffin purchased a car from defendant Burlington Volkswagen. This purchase required Griffin to obtain financing. According to Griffin, he was assured at the time of the sale by defendant Augustine Staino, an employee of Burlington Volkswagen, that he had already been approved for such financing. After paying a $1,000 deposit and signing a retail order form, G

20 These cases concern the boundaries of disclosure
21 obligations in registration statements and prospectuses
22 filed on Form N-1A pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933
23 (“Securities Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 77a et seq. In separate but
24 substantially similar putative class actions, two groups of
25 plaintiffs brought claims under sections 11, 12(a)(2), and
26 15 of th

The defendant, LUVRAJ, LLC,1 owned an internet-based jigsaw puzzle business named puzzlewarehouse.com. The business sold puzzles to customers in all fifty states; 120 patrons were located in Minnesota, accounting for roughly 2 percent of defendants’ active customers. In 2005, defendants decided to sell the puzzle business and posted internet advertisements soliciting potential buyers. The plaint