Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin

Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin

1968.C02.40334 391 F.2D 555

    • £0.49
    • £0.49

Publisher Description

On this appeal we are presented with significant questions involving the interpretation of recently amended Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Morton Eisen instituted this action seeking damages and injunctive relief on behalf of himself and all other purchasers and sellers of "odd-lots" on the New York Stock Exchange against Carlisle & Jacquelin and DeCoppet & Doremus, alleging that the two brokerage firms had combined and conspired to monopolize odd-lot trading, and had fixed the odd-lot differential at an excessive amount in violation of the Sherman Act. 15 U.S.C. Sections 1, 2. A third count alleged that the defendant New York Stock Exchange had failed to discharge its duties under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by neglecting to adopt rules protecting investors in odd-lots. 15 U.S.C. Sections 78f(b), 78f(d), 78s(a).

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1968
8 March
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
38
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
73.8
KB
City of New York v. Tug Mcallister Brothers City of New York v. Tug Mcallister Brothers
1938
Osborne v. Salvation Army. Osborne v. Salvation Army.
1939
Wold v. State Wold v. State
1973
United States v. Fatico United States v. Fatico
1978
National Labor Relations Board v. Paskesz National Labor Relations Board v. Paskesz
1969
In re Corporation In re Corporation
1939