Chanoff v. United States Surgical Corporation

Second Circuit

Chanoff v. United States Surgical Corporation

31 F.3d 66, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 19591

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedJuly 28, 1994

Docket2068

StatusPublished

This text of 31 F.3d 66 (Chanoff v. United States Surgical Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chanoff v. United States Surgical Corporation, 31 F.3d 66, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 19591 (2d Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

31 F.3d 66

William CHANOFF, David Chanoff, Rachel Chanoff and Harriet
Fingerote, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
UNITED STATES SURGICAL CORPORATION, Leon Hirsch, Turi
Josefson, Bruce C. Lustman and Marianne Scipione,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 2068, Docket 94-7332.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued July 21, 1994.
Decided July 28, 1994.

Plaintiffs-appellants appeal from Judge Nevas's ruling granting defendants-appellees' Rule 12(b)(6) motion with respect to plaintiffs' claims of, inter alia, common law fraud and federal securities violations. We affirm.

Barbara Moses, New York City (Gregory A. Markel, Gary E. Weiss, Michael B. Carlinsky, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, New York City, Thomas J. Byrne, James T. Shearin, Pullman & Comley, Bridgeport, CT, of counsel), for appellants.

Dale A. Schreiber, New York City (Charles S. Sims, Lawrence S. Block, Proskauer Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn, of counsel), for appellees.

Prior report: 857 F.Supp. 1011.

Before: WINTER, McLAUGHLIN, and JACOBS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

We affirm for substantially the reasons stated by the district court.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI