Jacobson v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.

Third Circuit

Jacobson v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.

824 F.2d 287

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided August 5, 1987·No. Nos. 85-3282, 85-3311, 85-3343, 85-5517, 85-5542, 85-5552·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

OPINION ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT

PER CURIAM:

The Supreme Court — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 3204, 96 L.Ed.2d 691 having vacated our decision in Jacobson v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, 797 F.2d 1197 (3d Cir.1986), and remanded the proceeding to us in light of Shearson/American Express, Inc. v. McMahon, — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 2332, 96 L.Ed.2d 185 (1987), we in turn now vacate the district court’s decision in Jacobson v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, 605 F.Supp. 510 (W.D.Pa.1984), and remand the case for further action consistent with the Supreme Court’s mandate.

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

OPINION ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT

PER CURIAM:

The Supreme Court — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 3204, 96 L.Ed.2d 691 having vacated our decision in Jacobson v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, 797 F.2d 1197 (3d Cir.1986), and remanded the proceeding to us in light of Shearson/American Express, Inc. v. McMahon, — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 2332, 96 L.Ed.2d 185 (1987), we in turn now vacate the district court’s decision in Jacobson v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, 605 F.Supp. 510 (W.D.Pa.1984), and remand the case for further action consistent with the Supreme Court’s mandate.

Jacobson v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 824 F.2d 287 (3d Cir. 1987).

Pincite

824 F.2d 287 (Jacobson v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related