Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 99,580 R.J. Wolf v. Banco Nacional De Mexico, S.A., A/K/A Banamex

The judgment appealed from does not dispose of all issues in the case and is therefore not an appealable judgment. The appeal must be dismissed.

The second amended complaint alleges three claims for relief. The first charges violation of 15 U.S.C. § 77v and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities and Exchange Commission, 17 C.F.R. § 240 .10b-5, in the solicitation of, and obtaining from Wolf, time deposits, in pesos, by means of the mail, the securities not being registered. The second charges that Wolf was defrauded by Bana-mex in the transactions. The third charges violation by Banamex of § 25110 of the California Corporations Code which is actionable under § 25503.

On cross motions for summary judgment, the court granted Wolf’s motion and denied Banamex’s motion. In its opinion, the court considered only the first claim for relief. Its reason is as follows:

Wolf v. Banco Nacional de Mexico, N.D. Cal., 1982, 549 F.Supp. 841 at 843 . The court then held that the deposits were securities, but did not further consider the second and third claims.

The judgment is a curious document. It reads, in full:

It does not specify whether judgment is for Wolf on all three claims, or only the first.…