§Why CasetextPricing

Pictet Overseas Inc. v. Helvetia Trust et al

MOTION for Permanent Injunction and Incorporated Memorandum of Law

11 Cited authorities

  1. Amoco Production Co. v. Gambell

    480 U.S. 531 (1987)   Cited 2,078 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a District Court did not err in declining to issue an injunction to bar exploratory drilling on Alaskan public lands, because the district court's decision "did not undermine" the policy of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. § 3120, and because the Secretary of the Interior had other means of meaningfully complying with the statute

  2. Merrill Lynch Investment Managers v. Optibase, Ltd.

    337 F.3d 125 (2d Cir. 2003)   Cited 223 times
    Holding that a non-signatory was not bound by an arbitral award where the plaintiff failed to adduce facts that would support an alter ego theory or any other theory on which a non-signatory can be forced to arbitrate

  3. KH Outdoor, LLC v. City of Trussville

    458 F.3d 1261 (11th Cir. 2006)   Cited 143 times
    Finding that the "loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable harm."

  4. Garcia-Mir v. Meese

    781 F.2d 1450 (11th Cir. 1986)   Cited 197 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that likelihood of success on appeal is the most important factor in considering whether or not to issue a stay pending appeal

  5. Wheat, First Securities, Inc. v. Green

    993 F.2d 814 (11th Cir. 1993)   Cited 149 times
    Holding that defendant-investors were not customers of NASD member firm on account of their relationship with agents of the firm's predecessor-in-interest because the acts giving rise to the question of arbitrability occurred before the plaintiff became a successor-in-interest

  6. Citigroup Global Markets Inc. v. Abbar

    761 F.3d 268 (2d Cir. 2014)   Cited 61 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that FINRA “customer” is one who, while not broker or dealer, either purchases good or service from FINRA member, or has account with FINRA member

  7. UBS Financial Services, Inc. v. Carilion Clinic

    706 F.3d 319 (4th Cir. 2013)   Cited 57 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "different or additional contractual arrangements for arbitration can supersede the rights conferred on customer by virtue of broker's membership in a self-regulating organization such as [FINRA]"

  8. Fleet Boston Robertson Stephens v. Innovex

    264 F.3d 770 (8th Cir. 2001)   Cited 57 times
    Holding that a party receiving banking and financial advice was not a “customer” under the National Association of Securities Dealers (“NASD”) Rules and therefore could not invoke members' arbitration obligations

  9. Morgan Keegan & Co. v. Shadburn

    829 F. Supp. 2d 1141 (M.D. Ala. 2011)   Cited 14 times

    Case No. 2:11–CV–624–WKW[WO]. 2011-11-3 MORGAN KEEGAN & COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. William SHADBURN, Defendant. Joshua Daniel Jones, Peter Sean Fruin, Maynard, Cooper & Gale, P.C., Birmingham, AL, for Plaintiff. Charles M. Thompson, Charles M. Thompson, P.C., Birmingham, AL, for Defendant. W. KEITH WATKINS Joshua Daniel Jones, Peter Sean Fruin, Maynard, Cooper & Gale, P.C., Birmingham, AL, for Plaintiff. Charles M. Thompson, Charles M. Thompson, P.C., Birmingham, AL, for Defendant. ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY

  10. White v. Alcon Film Fund, LLC

    955 F. Supp. 2d 1381 (N.D. Ga. 2013)   Cited 8 times

    Civil Action No. 1:13–cv–1163–TCB. 2013-07-24 Franklin WHITE, Plaintiff, v. ALCON FILM FUND, LLC, et al., Defendants. Alan Stuckey Clarke, The Entertainment Law Group Alan S. Clark & Associates, LLC, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff. Anthony D. Sbardellati, Gerald L. Sauer, Sauer & Wagner, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Anna Mirshak Burns, Gary S. Freed, Thompson Hine LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Defendants. TIMOTHY C. BATTEN Alan Stuckey Clarke, The Entertainment Law Group Alan S. Clark & Associates, LLC, Atlanta, GA

  11. Rule 65 - Injunctions and Restraining Orders

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 65   Cited 22,296 times   87 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing court's ability to enter emergency order with less than full adversary hearing and even, in appropriate circumstances, without notice