Joseph C. Canizaro v. Kohlmeyer & Company

Fifth Circuit

Joseph C. Canizaro v. Kohlmeyer & Company

512 F.2d 484, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 14842

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 2, 1975

Docket74-2014

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 512 F.2d 484 (Joseph C. Canizaro v. Kohlmeyer & Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Joseph C. Canizaro v. Kohlmeyer & Company, 512 F.2d 484, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 14842 (5th Cir. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The appellant, Canizaro, brought suit in the Southern District of New York against a number of New York defendants for damages for claimed violations of Section 12(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, Title 15 U.S.C. § 777(2), and 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5 promulgated pursuant to § 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Title 15 U.S.C. § 78j, and on various state law principles in connection with a purchase by Canizaro of certain securities in May 1970. A New Orleans, Louisiana based registered broker-dealer, Kohlmeyer & Company (Kohlmeyer), the appellee herein, served as Canizaro’s broker or seller in the actual consummation of the purchase, and was named as a defendant in addition to the New York defendants. Upon Kohlmeyer’s motion, the case against the appellee was severed and transferred to the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Following a full-scale trial on the merits, the district court found for the de *485 fendant-appellee on all counts 1 and entered the judgment appealed from. For reasons well stated by the trial court we agree that the plaintiff-appellant Cañizaro failed to prove a violation of either § 12(2) or of Rule 10b — 5, or to prove a case under applicable Louisiana law.

The judgment below was right, and is in all respects

Affirmed.

1

. The Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of the trial court are reported at 370 F.Supp. 282.

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

PER CURIAM:

The appellant, Canizaro, brought suit in the Southern District of New York against a number of New York defendants for damages for claimed violations of Section 12(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, Title 15 U.S.C. § 777(2), and 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5 promulgated pursuant to § 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Title 15 U.S.C. § 78j, and on various state law principles in connection with a purchase by Canizaro of certain securities in May 1970. A New Orleans, Louisiana based registered broker-dealer, Kohlmeyer & Company (Kohlmeyer), the appellee herein, served as Canizaro’s broker or seller in the actual consummation of the purchase, and was named as a defendant in addition to the New York defendants. Upon Kohlmeyer’s motion, the case against the appellee was severed and transferred to the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Following a full-scale trial on the merits, the district court found for the de *485 fendant-appellee on all counts 1 and entered the judgment appealed from. For reasons well stated by the trial court we agree that the plaintiff-appellant Cañizaro failed to prove a violation of either § 12(2) or of Rule 10b — 5, or to prove a case under applicable Louisiana law.

The judgment below was right, and is in all respects

Affirmed.

1

. The Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of the trial court are reported at 370 F.Supp. 282.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

512 F.2d 484, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 14842, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joseph-c-canizaro-v-kohlmeyer-company-ca5-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack