Joel R. Gaff v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that shareholders lack standing under RICO when the only damage is diminution of share value
• holding that “[i]n order to have dismissed [supplemental state-law] claims with prejudice, the district court had to have exercised [subject-matter] jurisdiction over the claims”
• reversing district court’s decision to exercise supplemental -7- jurisdiction after Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal
• noting it is a “general precept of corporate law that a shareholder of a corporation does not have a personal or individual right of action for damages based solely on an injury to the corporation”
• reversing district court’s decision to exercise supplemental jurisdiction after Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal
• shareholder lacks standing to bring direct cause of action under federal law when only damage alleged is diminution in corporate value

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).