Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,552 International Controls Corp. v. Robert L. Vesco, and Vesco & Co., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming default judgment in Securities Exchange Act case and distinguishing Frow on grounds that it only controls “in situations where the liability of one defendant necessarily depends upon the liability of the other”
• \[o]nly if the underlying judgments against Vesco are final is the subsequent execution order against the Company valid\
• “at most, Frow controls in situations where the liability of one defendant necessarily depends upon the liability of the others”
• “We think it is most unlikely that Frow retains any force subsequent to the adoption of Rule 54(b). In any event, at most, Frow controls in situations where the liability of one defendant necessarily depends upon the liability of the others.”
• “We think it is most unlikely that Frow retains any force subsequent to the adoption of Rule 54(b). In any event, at most, Frow controls in situations where the liability of one defendant necessarily depends upon the liability of the others.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).