Blue Sky L. Rep. P 71,536 A. B. Parvin, and Cross-Appellant v. Davis Oil Company, Jack Davis, Marvin Davis, and Paul Messinger, and Cross-Appellees

Good Law
655 F.2d 901
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 14, 198077-1663, 77-1664California1,934 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hufstedler, J.

Parvin sued Davis Oil Company (“DOC”) for damages arising from three investment contracts that Parvin contended violated both California and federal securities laws. The district court initially dismissed the action finding that (1) the oil and gas lease interests were not securities under either California or federal law, (2) the transactions did not involve sufficient contacts with California to permit application of California law, and (3) the transactions were private offerings exempted from the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933. We reversed (Parvin v. Davis Oil Co. (9th Cir. 1975) 524 F.2d 112 ), and we remanded the cause to the district court to decide whether the securities qualified un der the joint-venture exception to the California permit requirement and whether Parvin had the kind of access to information that would have appeared in the registration statement.

On remand, the district court found that these transactions failed to qualify under the joint venture exception under California law and that they failed to qualify under the private offering exception from the registration requirements under the Securities Act of 1933. The district court…

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.