Alexander

Alexander v. Stark

Good Law
99 F.3d 1145
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 6, 19801145California2,489 words

Opinion

Opinion

99 F.3d 1145 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Mark H. ALEXANDER; Phyllis N. Alexander, individually and as trustees of the Alexander Family Trust; Vincent Diserio; Joyce H. Diserio, individually and as trustees of the Trust dated November 6, 1980; Betty Hazelbaker, Plaintiffs/Appellees, v. John J. STARK, Defendant/Appellant. Mark H. ALEXANDER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Robert L. THOMAS, et al., Defendants. Carol STARK, Defendant/Appellant, v. Jim LANCE, Mary Waltari and Post, Kirby, Noonan & Sweat, Appellees. No. 94-56378, 95-55329. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 16, 1995. Withdrawn from Submission Nov. 24, 1995. Resubmitted June 4, 1996. Decided Oct. 15, 1996. Before: FLETCHER, CANBY, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Mark Alexander and other investors ("Investors") 1 sued John Stark for misrepresentation in violation of section 12(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. § 771 (2), and Rule…

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.