Gustafson v. Alloyd Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that identical terms in different parts of 1933 Act are intended to have the same meaning — in context of term \prospectus\
• holding that § 12(a)(2) does not relate to private sales or sales of securities in secondary market, i.e. shares that have been sold previously
• concluding that “[t]he intent of Congress and the design of the statute require that § 12[ (a)](2) liability be limited to public offerings”
• holding that where legislative history is considered, “it is preferable to consult the documents prepared by Congress while deliberating”
• ruling that identical terms in different parts of 1933 Act are intended to have the same meaning — in context of term “prospectus”
• recognizing that “[t]he intent of Congress and the design of the statute' require that § 12[ (a) ](2) liability be limited to public offerings”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).