Warner v. Jordan
Warner v. Jordan
Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Order affirmed. Each party to bear own costs.
Dissenting Opinion
DISSENTING OPINION
Appellee, David Warner, instituted this action pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities Act of 1933.
The record supports the trial court’s conclusion that the contract was in violation of the Securities Act. Appellant did not sustain his burden of proving that this was a private sale, exempt from the Securities Act.
Appellee, a close friend of appellant, helped set up the arrangement by which appellant obtained his stock in exchange for his rights to an invention. Appellee also helped promote the device. Appellee was familiar with appellant’s plan to sell securities over the counter; the sales were made through a brokerage firm recommended by appellee.
Appellee, a stockbroker with forty years experience, must have known that the stock appellant sold him was being sold in violation of the Securities Act of 1933. While appellant’s violation relieves appellee of the burden of any further performance of the contract, I would hold that appellee is estopped from obtaining damages now that the contract has proven unprofitable. See Straley v. Universal Uranium & Milling Corp., 289 F.2d 370 (9th Cir. 1961). On this record, neither party is entitled to the aid of the court. The award of damages against appellant should be reversed.
. 15 U.S.C.A. § 77Í (1971).
. See 15 U.S.C.A. § 77d (1971).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.