DePinto

DePinto v. Provident Security Life Insurance

Good Law
323 F.2d 826·7 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 791
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 1, 1963No. 18245California7,671 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hamley, J.

This suit, in the nature of a stockholder’s derivative' action, was commenced by John S. Gorsuch, then a stock *828 holder of United Security Life (United), an Arizona stock insurance corporation. Named as defendants in the amended complaint were United, American Security Investment Co. (American), United Finance Corporation, Angus J. DePinto, Hjalmar B. Landoe, Francis I. Sabo, Edwin B. Pegram, Elmer W. Duhame, and the eight other individuals listed in the margin.

The theory of the suit was that, by reason of fraud, negligence and breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment and conversion on the part of the personal defendants, assets of United were diverted from that corporation in connection with its purchase of 30,800 allegedly worthless shares of American.

DePinto, Landoe, Sabo, Pegram, Du-hame and several other defendants answered the amended complaint with general denials. DePinto also asserted affirmative defenses of laches and estop-pel based upon the merger of United with Provident Security Life Insurance Co. (Provident), another Arizona insurance stock corporation, subsequent to the commencement of the action. Each of the five personal defendants named above also…

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.