Phillips v. Alabama Credit Corp.

403 F.2d 693
CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit
DecidedNovember 25, 1968
DocketNo. 25398
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 403 F.2d 693 (Phillips v. Alabama Credit Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Phillips v. Alabama Credit Corp., 403 F.2d 693 (1st Cir. 1968).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Phillips appeals from summary judgment granted in favor of Alabama Credit Corp. Phillips was charged with violations of §§ 12(2), 17 of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 77l(2), 77q, and the Alabama misrepresentation statute, 7 Ala.Code § 108 (1958).1

Phillips claims that fraudulent intent need be proved and that he was entitled to have the jury determine that issue. It is clear that intent need not be proved in § 12(2) and § 17 cases. Wilko v. Swan, 1953, 346 U.S. 427, 431, 74 S.Ct. 182, 184, 98 L.Ed. 168, 173; S.E.C. v. Capital Gaines Research Bureau, 1963, 375 U.S. 180, 192, 195, 84 S.Ct. 275, 283, 11 L.Ed.2d 237, 246, 248. Here, the fact that Phillips had committed the fraudulent acts was overwhelmingly proved by affidavit. Indeed, Phillips' own deposition contains admissions that he participated in the fraudulent scheme.

The District Court found that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact regarding Phillips’ fraudulent acts. We agree.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Friedman v. Rayovac Corp.
295 F. Supp. 2d 957 (W.D. Wisconsin, 2003)
Banton v. Hackney
557 So. 2d 807 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1989)
Gridley v. Sayre & Fisher Co.
409 F. Supp. 1266 (D. South Dakota, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
403 F.2d 693, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phillips-v-alabama-credit-corp-ca1-1968.