Richard L. Zweig and Muriel Bruno v. The Hearst Corporation, a Corporation, Jerry Greenfield, Individually and as a Representative of a Class of Allpersons Similarly Situated v. The Hearst Corporation

521 F.2d 1129 32 A.L.R.Fed. 703, Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,256 Richard L. ZWEIG and Muriel Bruno, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. The HEARST CORPORATION, a corporation, Defendant-Appellee. Jerry GREENFIELD, Individually and as a representative of a class of allpersons similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The HEARST CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. Nos. 74-1979, 74-2028. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. July 21, 1975. 1 Philip M. Brown (argued), Beverly Hills, Cal., for plaintiffs-appellants. 2 Stephen G. Contopulos (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellee. OPINION 3 Before KOELSCH and CHOY, Circuit Judges, and McNICHOLS, * District Judge. McNICHOLS, District Judge: 4 The above-captioned actions have, by prior order, been consolidated for appeal. The appellee in each case is the same and the controversies arose out of a single transaction. Appellants rely on precisely identical grounds for reversal. 5 For the purposes of this appeal, jurisdiction in the District Court was founded on 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) and 17 CFR § 240 .10b-5 (the familiar Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities and Exchange Commission…