Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

BERNARD V. WASSEL AND SEVY WASSEL, HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, v. EDWARD M. EGLOWSKY, STEPHEN H. STILLERMAN, APPELLANTS,

PER CURIAM:

In an exhaustive opinion, the district judge granted judgment to plaintiffs Bernard V. Wassel and Sevy Wassel against defendants Edward M. Eglowsky and Stephen H. Stillerman, and he gave Eglowsky and Stillerman judgment for contribution against Arnold Goldman, a third-party defendant, exonerating Central Trust Company, another third-party defendant. Wassel v. Eglowsky, 399 F. Supp. 1330 (D.Md. 1975). Plaintiffs' recovery was grounded upon defendants' violation of § 12(1) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. § 77 l(1) (selling unregistered securities).

Defendants Eglowsky and Stillerman appeal, assigning numerous grounds for reversal. We find none of them meritorious, and we affirm on the opinion of the district court, adopting it as our own with regard to the violation of § 12(1) of the Act and defendants' right to contribution from Goldman.

AFFIRMED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

WASSEL v. EGLOWSKY
(Oct 19, 1976)