Satterfield v. Shatkin Investment Corp.

846 F.2d 636, 1988 WL 45844
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit·Decided May 13, 1988·No. No. 86-1374·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

EARL E. O’CONNOR, District Judge.

This action was brought by the plaintiffs against several defendants arising from various transfers of securities owned by the plaintiffs. The district court granted the motions for summary judgment filed by defendants-appellees Shatkin Investment Corp. and Brandt and Associates. Satter-field, v. Haymond, et al. (D.Utah 1985) [available on WESTLAW, 1985 WL 17576]. The lower court entered a separate judgment for these defendants pursuant to Rule 54 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The plaintiffs appealed.

Having examined the arguments presented on appeal by the plaintiffs, we find nothing that would warrant our disturbing the district court’s decision. We, therefore, affirm the trial court’s judgment substantially for the reasons stated in the court’s exhaustive and scholarly opinion.

AFFIRMED.

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

Satterfield v. Shatkin Investment Corp., 846 F.2d 636, 1988 WL 45844 (10th Cir. 1988).

846 F.2d 636 (Satterfield v. Shatkin Investment Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Satterfield v. Shatkin Investment Corp.
846 F.2d 636 (Tenth Circuit, 1988)