Skip to main content
· 5/20/2013

Johnson v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.

Citations

  • 719 F.3d 601
  • 55 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2032
  • 2013 WL 2149971
  • 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 10006

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting aprobable lack of federal district court subject matter jurisdiction when the plaintiff and the defendant agreed on all of the major legal issues, since no case or controversy under Article HI existed
  • “Merrill Lynch is not responsible for the freeze on the Plan account; the Wayne County Circuit Court judge is responsible for the freeze.”
  • Plaintiff Plan’s “injury is not fairly traceable to the defendant [financial institution].”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Wood, Tinder, Hamilton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.