Rivers v. Rosenthal & Co.

686 F.2d 297
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 20, 1982
DocketNo. 79-1313
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 686 F.2d 297 (Rivers v. Rosenthal & Co.) 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
Rivers v. Rosenthal & Co., 686 F.2d 297 (5th Cir. 1982).

Opinion

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before KRAVITCH, HENDERSON and REAVLEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The Supreme Court, -U.S. -, 102 S.Ct. 2228, 72 L.Ed.2d 841, has vacated our judgment (see 634 F.2d 774) and remanded for further consideration in light of Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith v. Curran, 456 U.S. -, 102 S.Ct. 1825, 72 L.Ed.2d 182 (1982). The Court in that decision held that an implied private right of action does exist under the Commodity Exchange Act.

The district court’s order denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss is therefore affirmed with all costs awarded against Rosenthal & Company.

AFFIRMED.

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

Related

Rivers v. Rosenthal & Company
686 F.2d 297 (Fifth Circuit, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
686 F.2d 297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rivers-v-rosenthal-co-ca5-1982.