Godair v. Place Vendome

3 Citing cases

  1. Matthews v. Stolier

    207 F. Supp. 3d 678 (E.D. La. 2016)   Cited 1 times

    Because Louisiana courts also apply the Reves analysis in determining whether state securities laws should apply, these claims must also be dismissed as a matter of law.Godair v. Place Vendome Corp. of America, 648 So.2d 440, 444 (La.App. 1 Cir.1994). B. The WJLT-Matthews Note

  2. Delgado v. Ctr. on Children, Inc.

    CIVIL ACTION NO: 10-2753 (E.D. La. Jul. 13, 2012)   Cited 1 times

    La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 51:7012(15)(a) (West 2012). Louisiana securities law was modeled after the federal system, and Louisiana courts employ the Reves analysis to determine whether a particular note is a security under Louisiana law. Godair v. Place Vendome Corp. of America, 648 So. 2d 440, 444 (La. App. 1 Cir. 1994). As previously discussed, the notes at issue in this case are securities under a Reves analysis.

  3. Perrysburg Twp. v. Rossford

    149 Ohio App. 3d 645 (Ohio Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 19 times
    Pleading breach of contract and unjust enrichment in the alternative does not negate the validity of either claim and does not warrant the dismissal of unjust enrichment claim

    {¶ 39} Initially, a note is presumed to be to be a security. Reves v. Ernst Young at 64-65; Bass v. Janney Montgomery Scott (C.A. 6, 2000), 210 F.3d 577, 584; Godair v. Place Vendome Corp. of America (La.App. 1994), 648 So.2d 440, 444. However, this presumption can be rebutted if the note bears a strong resemblance to enumerated categories of instruments including: (1) a note secured by a home mortgage; (2) a note delivered in consumer financing; (3) a short term note held as a lien on a small business or some of its assets; (4) a note evidencing a character loan to a bank customer; (5) a short term note secured by an assignment of accounts receivable; (6) a note evidencing a loan by a commercial bank; and (7) a note formalizing an open account debt in the ordinary course of business.