Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Cahill v. Anderson

decided: June 29, 1987.

JOHN P. CAHILL, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
ARTHUR ANDERSON & COMPANY, A PARTNERSHIP ENTERPRISE, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE; JOHN P. CAHILL, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, V. ROBERT CHAMBERS, J. KEVIN MURPHY, JOSEPH F. CARLINO, JAMES E. HEALEY, MARC C. GILLEN AND JOHN DOES 1-5, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES



Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum, Judge, summarily dismissing complaint and denying motion to vacate judgment in earlier action. Affirmed.

Before: FEINBERG, Chief judge, KEARSE and WINTER, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:

Plaintiff pro se John P. Cahill appeals from a December 22, 1986 judgment entered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York ("1986 Judgment"), Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum, Judge, (1) summarily dismissing his complaint against defendant Arthur Anderson & Company ("Anderson"), which alleged that Anderson had conspired with other in violation of, inter alia, the Racketeering Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq. (1982), and § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b) (1982), to force Cahill to sell his interest in Corporate Time-Sharing Services, Inc., and (2) denying his motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) to vacate the judgment in Cahill v. Chambers, 82 Civ. 6327 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 14, 1983) ("1983 Judgment"), which had been entered pursuant to an agreement among all of the parties therein, who did not include Anderson, to settle Cahill's similar claims against the defendants therein. We find no abuse of discretion in the denial of relief from the 1983 Judgment, and we affirm the 1986 Judgment on the ground that the 1983 Judgment constituted res judicata for the reasons stated by Judge Cedarbaum in her opinion dated December 17, 1986, published at 659 F. Supp. 1115.

19870629

© 1998 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.