Cases

OPINION AND ORDER MELINDA HARMON, UNITED . STATES DISTRICT JUDGE The above referenced putative class action alleges violations of the following securities -fraud statutes through ■ Defendants’ scheme to optimize revenue in investment banking fees from UBS Securities LLC’s corporate client, Enron Corp. (“Enron”), at the expense and defrauding of UBS Financial Service’s brokerage retail clients, Lead Plaint

PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 601 U. S. Part 1 Pages 23–41 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT February 8, 2024 Page Proof Pending Publication REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are requ

799 F.Supp.2d 749 (2011) GENERAL RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF the CITY OF DETROIT, and Police and Fire Retirement System of the City of Detroit, Plaintiffs, v. UBS, AG, UBS Securities, LLC, and UBS Investment Bank, Defendants. Case No. 10-CV-13920. United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division. June 30, 2011. *753 Christ

CHIN, Circuit Judge: In this case, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”), as conservator of the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”), sued UBS Americas Inc., certain affiliated entities, and several officers (collectively, “UBS”) for fraud and misrepresentation in connection with the marketing and

PRESKA, Chief District Judge, dissenting: Puzzlingly, the majority declines to answer the question squarely presented in this appeal — whether an issuer of securities is entitled under the FINRA Rules to arbitrate a dispute with its underwriter regarding the underwriting. More puzzlingly yet, the majority affirms a decision that such a dispute is subject to mandatory arbitration by answering a different question

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JAMES C. FRANCIS, IV, United States Magistrate Judge. The spoliation motion now before the Court raises significant issues about when the duty to preserve evidence arises, what constitutes ah adequate litigation hold, and what degree of culpability warrants spoliation sanctions. Determination of the motion ultimately turns, however, on whether relevant information has been

19-1769(L) Sullivan v. UBS AG United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit August Term 2023 Argued: April 30, 2024 Decided: August 22, 2025 Nos. 19-1769(L), 19-2012(XAP) STEPHEN SULLIVAN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, WHITE OAK FUND LP, FRONTPOINT PARTNERS TRADING FUND, L.P., FRONTPOINT AU

REBECCA R. PALLMEYER, United States District Judge *642The short-term cash management firm Sentinel Management Group, Inc. collapsed and filed for bankruptcy in August 2007 at the outset of the financial crisis. Required by federal law to segregate its clients' funds and invest in only the highest grade government securities, Sentinel instead pledged the securities in i

772 F.Supp.2d 914 (2011) Nora GILHOOLY, Plaintiff, v. UBS SECURITIES, LLC, Defendant. Case No. 10 C 7260. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division. February 14, 2011. Thomas Carl Crooks, Attorney at Law, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff. Sheldon Toby Zenner, Elizabeth Erin McDonald, Kyle Anne Petersen, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Chicago, IL, f

Miriam Equities, LLC v. LB-UBS 2007-C2 Millstream Rd., LLC, 2021 NCBC 71. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION GUILFORD COUNTY 19 CVS 8523 MIRIAM EQUITIES, LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company, Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND OPINION ON

LOHIER, Circuit Judge: We are asked to determine whether a broker’s disclosures to its customers regarding margin maintenance requirements for margin accounts complied with Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-16, 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-16, promulgated thereunder. WC Capital Management, LLC (“WC”), Willow Creek Capital Partners, L.P

OPINION SWEET, District Judge. Plaintiffs The NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc. and The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (collectively “NASDAQ” or the “Plaintiffs”) have moved to enjoin an arbitration filed by defendant UBS Securities LLC (“UBS” or the “Defendant”), and UBS has cross-moved to dismiss NASDAQ’s complaint (the “Complaint”) with prejudice. Upon the facts and conclusions set forth b

OPINION OF THE COURT Román, J. In 2008, during the financial crisis that left many financial services companies holding billions of dollars in “toxic assets” (undervalued and underperforming assets), plaintiff and defendant UBS Real Estate Securities Inc. (UBSRE) entered into an agreement whereby plaintiff was to act as UBSRE’s “financial advisor and investment banker in the proposed sale of certain of [U

LARRY A. JONES, SR., J. {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant Albert Lacava ("Lacava"), pro se, appeals from the trial court's July 28, 2017 decision granting summary judgment in favor of plaintiff-appellee UBS Financial Services, Inc. 1 For the reasons that follow, we affirm. I. Factual

OPINION SWEET, District Judge. Defendant UBS, AG (“UBS-AG” or the “Defendant”) has moved pursuant to Rules 12(b)2, 12(b)6 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the common law doctrine of forum non conveniens to dismiss the complaint of plaintiff Susan Giordano, executrix of the Estate of Ida Giordano (“Gior-dano” or the “Plaintiff”) alleging breach of fiduciary duty, malpractice,

****************************************************** The ‘‘officially released’’ date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ‘‘officially released’’ date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ‘‘o

OPINION OF THE COURT Román, J. In 2008, during the financial crisis that left many financial services companies holding billions of dollars in “toxic assets” (undervalued and underperforming assets), plaintiff and defendant UBS Real Estate Securities Inc. (UBSRE) entered into an agreement whereby plaintiff was to act as UBSRE’s “financial advisor and investment banker in the proposed sale of certain of [U

684 F.Supp.2d 351 (2010) UBS SECURITIES LLC, Plaintiff, v. Fridolin VOEGELI, Marcel Grubenmann, Hans-Felix Voegeli, Thomas Bachmann, Felix Scherrer, Primus Fellmann, Marco Gemma, and Ernesto Surbeck, Defendants. No. 09 Civ. 8872 (DLC). United States District Court, S.D. New York. January 26, 2010. *352 Robert J. Giuffra, Jr., Bre

RULING RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. NO. 53) JANET C. HALL, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff, Mary Barker, brings this case against UBS AG and its wholly-owned subsidiary, UBS Securities, LLC (collectively “defendants” or “UBS”), alleging that defendants terminated her employment in violation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act’s whistleblower provision (hereafter “S

STRAUB, Circuit Judge, dissenting: Sixteen billion dollars. Over four hundred million shares. Facebook. The high-profile” nature of this case sways the majority’s analysis. It is true that the Face-book IPO was front-page news. But it simply cannot be true that every time a case involves a famous company or a multibillion dollar IPO, federal courts have jurisdiction. By exercising federal q