Bulgo v. Munoz

Good Law
853 F.2d 710
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 2, 198887-2297California4,142 words

Opinion

Opinion

853 F.2d 710 Blue Sky L. Rep. P 72,765 Joseph BULGO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Frank MUNOZ, also known as Frank Munoz Martin, individually; Land & Construction Company, Inc., a Hawaii corporation; Paine Webber, Inc., formerly Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis, Inc.; Alex Lau, an individual, Defendants- Appellees. Nos. 87-2297, 87-2646. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted July 12, 1988. Decided Aug. 2, 1988. John H. Boone, San Francisco, Cal., James M. Dombroski, Honolulu, Hawaii, for plaintiff-appellant. Richard R. Clifton, Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright, Paul A. Lynch, Case & Lynch, Honolulu, Hawaii, for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii. Before BROWNING, SNEED, and TROTT, Circuit Judges. SNEED, Circuit Judge: 1 Joseph Bulgo's second amended complaint set forth six claims of misconduct pertaining to a securities transaction against Frank Munoz (Munoz), Land and Construction Co. (L & C), PaineWebber, Inc. (PaineWebber) and Alex Lau (Lau). Numerous rulings were made by the district court and certain special verdicts were returned by the jury. The result is that Bulgo's claims…

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.