Justia U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries

This appeal stemmed from the collapse of the hedge fund Lipper Convertibles. On appeal, plaintiffs challenged the district court's grant of summary judgment on their federal claims against Lipper Convertibles' auditor, PwC, under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq., as well as their state law claims of fraud and negligent misrepresentation. The court concluded that there was a genuine dispute as to whether plaintiffs suffered a direct injury at the time of investment by purchasing their shares in Lipper Convertibles funds at fraudulently inflated prices. Accordingly, the court vacated the district court's grant of summary judgment on the Section 10(b) claims and remanded to the district court to consider in the first instance PwC's scienter argument and for further proceedings. The court affirmed the state law claims. View "CILP Assocs., L.P. v. PriceWaterhouse Coopers LLP" on Justia Law

Defendant appealed his conviction for possession of a firearm after a felony conviction. The district court denied defendant's motion to suppress the firearm discovered by the police. Defendant argued that he was stopped without reasonable suspicion because the stop was primarily based upon a pair of anonymous 911 calls from the same caller. The court reversed and remanded, holding that there was no reasonable suspicion to support the stop. The government failed to identify the specific and articulable facts that would have justified a stop of defendant at that point in time. Accordingly, the court vacated the conviction. View "United States v. Freeman" on Justia Law

Plaintiff filed suit against defendants for overtime wages. The parties eventually agreed to a settlement. The district court approved the settlement and granted plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees. Defendants subsequently appealed the district court's decision on plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees. The court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the appeal was untimely where the entry of judgment did not restart the time to appeal. View "Perez v. AC Roosevelt Food Corp." on Justia Law

Defendant was convicted of cocaine offenses and related gun possession. Defendant, pro se, moved to recall the court's mandates related to his conviction, and to reinstate his direct appeal in order to seek relief under the Supreme Court's recent holding in Alleyne v. United States. The court could not authorize defendant's collateral attack where a new rule was not made retroactive to cases on collateral review unless the Supreme Court holds it to be retroactive. The Supreme Court announced the Alleyne rule on a direct appeal without expressly holding it to be retroactive to cases on collateral review. Further, Alleyne does not fall within a category of cases previously held to be retroactive. Defendant's remaining contentions were without merit. Accordingly, the court denied defendant's motion, construing it as one for leave to file a successive 28 U.S.C. 2255 motion. The court also denied defendant's motion for appointment of counsel as moot. View "United States v. Redd (Shue)" on Justia Law