California Court of Appeal

In action arising out of merger of two companies, judgment for defendants is affirmed over primary claims that: 1) trial court's use of an in limine motion to adjudicate plaintiff's claim under section 11 of the federal Securities Act of 1933 deprived him of the right to a jury trial on a statute of limitations issue; and 2) a postjudgment order awarding attorney's fees in a related case on the ground the claim was "without merit and bordered on frivolity," and the contract action really sounded in tort.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/17/2008
• Published 01/17/2008

Judges

• PREMO, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• The Elstead Law Firm, John Clifton Elstead, Pleasanton, Esner, Chang & Ellis, Andrew N. Chang, Oakland, Stuart B. Esner, Los Angeles, Gregory R. Ellis, for Plaintiff and Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Nossaman, Guthner, Knox & Elliott, Patrick J. Richard, San Francisco, for Defendants and Respondents.