§Why CasetextPricing

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Nadel et al

REPLY to response to motion re MOTION for miscellaneous relief, specifically to Enjoin State Court Proceedings and for Possession of Jewelry

18 Cited authorities

  1. Liberte Capital Group, LLC v. Capwill

    462 F.3d 543 (6th Cir. 2006)   Cited 185 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that once assets are placed in receivership, the receivership court has a valid interest in the value of the claims and the cost of defending any suit as a drain on receivership assets

  2. Securities and Exchange Com'n v. Elliott

    953 F.2d 1560 (11th Cir. 1992)   Cited 258 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by disallowing tracing, when allowing a defrauded investor to recoup his entire investment would elevate his position over that of similarly situated victims, thereby creating an inequitable result

  3. Securities Exch. Com'n v. Wencke

    622 F.2d 1363 (9th Cir. 1980)   Cited 155 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a district court may issue an order staying a non-party from bringing litigation against receivership entities except by leave of court

  4. Harkin v. Brundage

    276 U.S. 36 (1928)   Cited 190 times
    In Harkin v. Brundage, 276 U.S. 36, 48 S.Ct. 268, 72 L.Ed. 457, the court held that jurisdiction of the Federal court [(D.C.) 13 F.2d 617] was invoked through the practice of fraud by the moving litigant and therefore must be surrendered.

  5. Liberte Capital Group, LLC v. Capwill

    421 F.3d 377 (6th Cir. 2005)   Cited 31 times
    Holding that, under the due process clause, an investor was entitled to a hearing before the court authorized a receiver to seize proceeds from the investor’s life settlement policy

  6. Palmer v. Texas

    212 U.S. 118 (1909)   Cited 163 times
    In Palmer v. Texas, the suit in the state court was an action by the State to forfeit the charter of the corporation and wind up its affairs.

  7. Smith v. Waggoners Trucking Corp.

    2009 CA 1876 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 10 times

    No. 2009-CA-01876-COA. August 30, 2011. Appeal from the Circuit Court, Washington County, Richard A. Smith, J. Michael Richard Brown, Thandi Wade, for appellant. Leann W. Nealey, Arthur D. Spratlin Jr., Ridgeland, Jody Edward Owens II, for Appellees. Before IRVING, P.J., BARNES and MAXWELL, JJ. MAXWELL, J., for the Court: ¶ 1. Suzette Smith's vehicle rear-ended a non-party's Chevrolet Suburban. The Suburban was stopped on Highway 82 in Leland, Mississippi, to allow defendant, Antonio Watson, to complete

  8. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Credit Bancorp

    93 F. Supp. 2d 475 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)   Cited 17 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "where a court has appointed a receiver and obtained jurisdiction over the receivership of estate, as here, the power to stay competing actions falls within the court's inherent power to prevent interference with the administration of that estate."

  9. Schauss v. Metals Depository Corp.

    757 F.2d 649 (5th Cir. 1985)   Cited 35 times

    No. 84-1398. April 15, 1985. Thomas S. Leatherbury, Dallas, Tex., Leon, Weill Mahony, New York City, for defendant-appellant. John E. Collins, Garnett E. Hendrix, Jr., Dallas, Tex., for Schauss. Wm. C. Meier, Peter H. Fulton, Hurst, Tex., for First Nat. Bank. Alan Leibel, Dallas, Tex., for Mabry. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. Before BROWN, WILLIAMS, and GARWOOD, Circuit Judges. JOHN R. BROWN, Circuit Judge: In this appeal, we are asked to vacate

  10. U.S. v. Petters

    Civil No. 08-5348 ADM/JSM (D. Minn. Dec. 12, 2008)   Cited 5 times
    Granting a motion to intervene for the limited purpose of lifting the stay of litigation because "a practical, commonsense application of Rule 24 suggests intervention for th[at] limited purpose . . . is appropriate here"

  11. Section 1651 - Writs

    28 U.S.C. § 1651   Cited 11,011 times   60 Legal Analyses
    Granting us the power to "issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of [our] . . . jurisdiction[] and agreeable to the usages and principles of law"

  12. Section 726.105 - Transfers fraudulent as to present and future creditors

    Fla. Stat. § 726.105   Cited 442 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Providing for avoidance where the debtor does not "receiv[e] a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer or obligation"

  13. Section 726.101 - Short title

    Fla. Stat. § 726.101   Cited 108 times   1 Legal Analyses

    This act may be cited as the "Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act." Fla. Stat. § 726.101 s. 1, ch. 87-79.

  14. Section 726.108 - Remedies of creditors

    Fla. Stat. § 726.108   Cited 102 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Rendering fraudulent transfers voidable and/or allowing recovery of judgment by plaintiff creditor in amount of transferred assets