Jacobson v. Aeg Capital Corp.

Good Law
50 F.3d 1493·95 Daily Journal DAR 3968·27 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 14·33 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 270·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 6235
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 29, 199592-16603California5,351 words

Opinion

Opinion

50 F.3d 1493 63 USLW 2655 , Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,649 , 33 Collier Bankr.Cas.2d 270 , 27 Bankr.Ct.Dec. 14 , Bankr. L. Rep. P 76,446 James JACOBSON, and Arthur Fury, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. AEG CAPITAL CORP.; Frank Maier; Gunther Ertelt; and John Does 1-10, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 92-16603. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Feb. 8, 1994. Decided March 29, 1995. James R. Malone, Jr., Chimicles, Jacobsen & Tikellis, Haverford, PA, Andrew J. Ogilvie, San Francisco, CA, for plaintiffs-appellants. Jerome S. Hirsch, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, New York City, for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Before: POOLE, BEEZER and NELSON, Circuit Judges. POOLE, Circuit Judge: 1 Plaintiffs James Jacobson and Arthur Fury (Jacobson and Fury), shareholders of Siliconix, Inc., appeal the district court's dismissal of their securities fraud action which alleged that AEG Capital Corporation (AEG) and two AEG directors had violated section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. Sec.…

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.