DeGorter v. Capitol Bancorp Ltd. Even though plaintiff contends that “the business of the parties was to buy, develop, and market banks and bank services” and the underlying transaction was the purchase and sale of a bank, since plaintiff’s unfair trade practices claim is based on allegations that defendants deceived him into buying securities, plaintiff’s claim is not based on activities “in or affecting commerce” within the meaning of the Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
Defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted.
Katyle v. Penn National Gaming Inc. (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-01-0289, 31 pp.) (Baldock, J.) No. 09-2272, March 14, 2010; USDC at Greenbelt, Md. (Messitte, J.) 4th Cir. Click here for the full text of the opinion. Holding: Plaintiffs, investors who were disappointed after a gaming company’s projected leveraged buyout failed to go through in 2008, [...]
Latta v. Rainey. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-07-0208, 29 pp.) (Robert C. Hunter, J.) Appealed from Wilson County Superior Court. (William C. Griffin Jr., J.) N.C. App. Holding: Because the defendant’s company and not the defendant individually was the “offeror” of the securities at issue, the investments marketed by the defendant were not exempt from the [...]
U.S. Securities & Exchange Comm’n v. Pirate Investor LLC. (Lawyers Weekly No. 09-01-0881, 38 pp.) (Per Curiam) No. 08-1037, Sept. 15, 2009; USDC at Baltimore, Md. (Garbis, J.) 4th Cir. Holding: Pirate Investor, a Maryland LLC that publishes investment newsletters and subscriber e-mail “blasts,” violated federal securities laws when it sold an e-mail stock tip [...]
Matrix Capital Mgmt. Fund LP v. BearingPoint Inc. (Lawyers Weekly No. 09-01-0725, 49 pp.) (Michael, J.) No. 08-1035, July 31, 2009; USDC at Alexandria, Va. (O’Grady) 4th Cir. Holding: Disappointed investors’ allegations that defendant company was seeking to avoid a default on its credit agreements in its statement to investors on a goodwill impairment charge [...]
In re aaiPharma, Inc. Securities Litigation. (Lawyers Weekly No. 07-02-1375, 12 pp.) (James C. Dever III, J. – Order) E.D.N.C. Where plaintiffs cannot show that defendant Ernst & Young was severely reckless in issuing its audit opinion in relation to defendant aaiPharma, then plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for securities fraud. Ernst &Young’s [...]
In re aaiPharma, Inc. Securities Litigation. (Lawyers Weekly No. 07-02-1375, 12 pp.) (James C. Dever III, J. – Order) E.D.N.C. Where plaintiffs cannot show that defendant Ernst & Young was severely reckless in issuing its audit opinion in relation to defendant aaiPharma, then plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for securities fraud. Ernst &Young’s [...]
