Betz

Betz v. Trainer

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 3, 200705-15704California5,445 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gould, J.

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

HEIDE BETZ, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, v. No. 05-15704 TRAINER WORTHAM & COMPANY,  D.C. No.

CV-03-03231-SI

INC.; DAVID P. COMO; FIRST

REPUBLIC BANK, a Nevada OPINION corporation; ROBERT VILE, Defendants-Appellees.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Susan Yvonne Illston, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted February 12, 2007—San Francisco, California

Filed October 4, 2007

Before: John T. Noonan, Jr., Ronald M. Gould, and Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Circuit Judges.

Opinion by Judge Gould

13461 BETZ v. TRAINER WORTHAM & CO. 13465

COUNSEL

Joseph M. Alioto, San Francisco, California, Theodore F. Schwartz, St. Louis, Missouri, and Myron Moskovitz, Berke- ley, California, for the plaintiff-appellant.

Sara B. Brody and Alexander M.R. Lyon, Heller Ehrman, LLP, San Francisco, California, for the defendants-appellees.

OPINION

GOULD, Circuit Judge:

We must decide whether Heide Betz’s federal securities fraud claim is barred by the statute of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.