Wharf (Holdings) Ltd. v. United International Holdings, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “ordi­ nary state breach-of-contract claims” are “actions that lie outside the [Securities Exchange] Act’s basic objectives”
• holding that selling securities while secretly never intending to honor them is a § 10(b) violation
• holding that representation coupled with secret intent not to complete the sale was sufficient to plead the “in connection with” element
• holding that the plaintiff alleged securities fraud where he claimed that the defendant sold him a security “while secretly intending from the very beginning not to honor” it
• holding that the Blue Chip Stamps rule does not apply to an oral agreement to purchase a stock option
• holding that selling securities while secretly never intending to honor them is a § 10(b) violation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).