§Why CasetextPricing

Nomura Home Equity Loan, Inc., Series 2006-FM2, by HSBC Bank USA, National Association, solely in its capacity as Trustee, et al., Respondents,v.Nomura Credit & Capital, Inc., Appellant. (And Three Other Actions.)

Brief

24 Cited authorities

  1. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n v. Waffle House, Inc.

    534 U.S. 279 (2002)   Cited 1,481 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a private arbitration agreement between an employee and an employer could not bind a nonparty governmental agency, the EEOC, and thus that the agreement—which was enforceable against the employee under the Federal Arbitration Act—did not limit the types of remedies the agency could seek in an enforcement action it initiated under Title VII

  2. Wright v. Ernst & Young LLP

    152 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 1998)   Cited 634 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may not amend its complaint by advancing a new theory of liability for the first time in its opposition to a motion to dismiss

  3. Kass v. Kass

    91 N.Y.2d 554 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 551 times
    Holding that the parties’ agreement controlled

  4. People v. Applied Card

    2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 5780 (N.Y. 2008)   Cited 200 times
    Holding that, when determining whether to apply res judicata to non-parties, courts “must determine whether the severe consequences of preclusion flowing from a finding of privity strike a fair result under the circumstances”

  5. Aramony v. United Way of America

    254 F.3d 403 (2d Cir. 2001)   Cited 209 times
    Holding "because the plan specifies with such clarity which tax provisions are to be taken into account, we find it unreasonable to treat the imprecision of the general purpose clause as overriding the specificity of the detailed computation clauses"

  6. In re Westmoreland Coal Co. v. Entech, Inc.

    100 N.Y.2d 352 (N.Y. 2003)   Cited 197 times
    Holding claims that seller breached representations and warranties that its closing balance sheet was prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP were subject to resolution by the courts, not arbitration

  7. Kalisch-Jarcho, Inc. v. City of New York

    58 N.Y.2d 377 (N.Y. 1983)   Cited 323 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a no damage-for-delay clause would be unenforceable where a party had acted with "bad faith and with deliberate intent"

  8. J. D'Addario & Co. v. Embassy Indus., Inc.

    2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 7850 (N.Y. 2012)   Cited 89 times
    Holding the "use of terms 'sole remedy,' 'sole obligation,' and 'no further rights' by the parties," alongside other provisions, made it "sufficiently clear" that the parties intended to exclude statutory interest from any damages award

  9. Morrison v. National Broadcasting Co.

    19 N.Y.2d 453 (N.Y. 1967)   Cited 209 times
    Rejecting attempt to characterize action for injury to reputation as intentional tort rather than as defamation because " contrary result might very well enable plaintiffs in libel and slander cases to circumvent the otherwise short limitations period by the simple expedient of `redescribing defamation action to fit this new noncategory'" of intentional wrong, quoting Kroner, Torts, 1966 Annual Survey of American Law 209, 215

  10. Israel v. Chabra

    2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 2261 (N.Y. 2009)   Cited 37 times
    Answering certified question by 537 F.3d 86 (2d Cir.2008)

  11. Section 77k - Civil liabilities on account of false registration statement

    15 U.S.C. § 77k   Cited 2,111 times   80 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable for a false registration statement "every person who was a director of . . . or partner in the issuer" at time of filing

  12. Section 860D - REMIC defined

    26 U.S.C. § 860D   Cited 28 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Defining REMICs