Raul F. Rodriguez v. Banco Central Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that this court “took steps to preserve what claims [we] could for the buyers” and “permitted the buyers to go to trial on ... marginal RICO security claim[s]”
• observing that “the Supreme Court cases mark out a concept, not a precise definition,” and require that the term “securities” be “flexibly applied to capture new arrangements comprising the essence of securities, however they may be named”
• observing that “the Supreme Court cases mark out a concept, not a precise definition,” and require that the term “securities” be “flexibly applied to capture new arrangements comprising the essence of securities, however they may be named”
• defining security as an “interest in a ‘common enterprise’ that, through the efforts of the promoter or others, is expected to generate profits for the security holder, either for direct distribution or as an increase in the value of the investment”
• “The magistrate judge correctly ruled that 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the in 11 forma pauperis statute, does not waive payment of fees or expenses for witnesses.”
• “The magistrate judge correctly ruled that 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the in 8 | forma pauperis statute, does not waive payment of fees or expenses for witnesses.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).