Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore
- Decided
- January 9, 1979
- Docket
- 77-1305
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 4,229 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- recognizing that many procedural devices 22 that limit a civil jury’s domain, including directed verdict, retrial, and summary judgment, are not inconsistent with the Seventh Amendment — Jacqueline Gebert v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. (2023)
- concluding that the use of offensive collateral estoppel should not be precluded in federal courts — Gunnells v. Healthplan Services, Inc. (2003)
- recognizing that the fear of related private litigation is often an impetus to defend vigorously a suit brought by the government — In the Matter of Harlan Charles Raiford, Ii. Harlan Charles Raiford, Ii, Debtor-Appellant v. Benjamin C. Abney, Trustee-Appellee (1983)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
[*324] Mr. Justice Stewart delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case presents the question whether a party who has had issues of fact adjudicated adversely to it in an equitable action may be collaterally estopped from relitigating the same issues before a jury in a subsequent legal action brought against it by a new party.
The respondent brought this stockholder’s class action against the petitioners in a Federal District Court. The complaint alleged that the petitioners, Parklane Hosiery Co., Inc. (Parklane), and 13 of its officers, directors, and stockholders, had issued a materially false and misleading proxy statement in connection with a merger.[1] The proxy statement, according to the complaint, had violated §§ 14 (a), 10 (b), and 20 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 48 Stat. 895, 891, 899, as amended, 15 U. S. C.. §§ 78n (a), 78j (b), and 78t (a), as well as various rules and regulations promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The complaint sought damages, rescission of the merger, and recovery of costs.
Statutes cited
Cite this
Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore, 439 U.S. 322 (1979)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.