Abram Chasins v. Smith, Barney & Co., Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that defendant’s failure to disclose its market maker status was material omission under Section 10(b), despite fact that SEC had never previously held that such disclosure was required
• failure to disclose that broker‐dealer was a market maker in the stock it recommended was a material omission
• failure to disclose that broker-dealer was a market maker in the stock it recommended was a material omission
• “the test is properly one of tort ‘causation in fact’ ”
• \the test is properly one of tort 'causation in fact' \
• Rule 10b-5 case; “failure to inform the customer fully of its possible conflict of interest, in that it was a market maker in the securities which it strongly recommended for purchase by him, was an omission of material fact”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).