Baker, Watts & Company v. Miles & Stockbridge Timothy R. Casgar, Baker, Watts & Company v. Miles & Stockbridge Timothy R. Casgar

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that federal securities laws did not preempt a state-law claim for contribution when such a claim would “further the regulatory purposes of the federal securities laws by holding all violators to account”
• determining that state-law claim for indemnification would “allow a securities wrongdoer . . . to shift its entire responsibility for federal violations on the basis of a collateral state action for indemnification”
• “Indemnification, of course, involves shifting the entire loss from one wrongdoer to another; contribution requires each wrongdoer to pay his proportion—or pro rata—share of the adverse judgment.”
• “[C]ontribution requires each wrongdoer to pay his proportion—or pro rata—share of the adverse judgment.”
• “Indemnification, of course, involves shifting the entire loss from one 25 SUPREME COURT OF OHIO wrongdoer to another; contribution requires each wrongdoer to pay his proportionate—or pro rata—share of the adverse judgment.”
• “[D]e facto claims for indemnification . . . are preempted.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).