Elliott Associates, L.P. v. Hayes

26 F. App'x 83
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided January 18, 2002·No. Docket No. 01-7078·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

IN CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED.

Plaintiffs Elliott Associates, L.P. and Westgate International, L.P. appeal from the district court’s dismissal under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) of their claims alleging violations of (1) § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b); (2) Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5, and (3) § 20(a) of the 1935 Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78t(a). The complaint alleges that defendants committed actionable fraud because they intended, at the time of executing their investment agreement with plaintiffs, not to honor their contractual obligation of allowing an “absolute and unconditional” right to convert preferred shares into common shares.

We agree with the district court that the complaint failed to allege particular facts supporting a strong inference of fraudulent intent. As a result, it failed to satisfy the requirement of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(b)(2).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

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

Elliott Associates, L.P. v. Hayes, 26 F. App'x 83 (2d Cir. 2002).

26 F. App'x 83 (Elliott Associates, L.P. v. Hayes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sama v. Mullaney
S.D. New York, 2020
LaMonica v. Tilton (In re Transcare Corp.)
592 B.R. 272 (S.D. New York, 2018)
Alki Partners, L.P. v. Windhorst
472 F. App'x 7 (Second Circuit, 2012)
BHC Interim Funding, L.P. v. Finantra Capital, Inc.
283 F. Supp. 2d 968 (S.D. New York, 2003)