Opinion
No. 245, Docket 71-1576.
Argued December 6, 1971.
Decided December 28, 1971.
Richard J. Stull, New York City (Stull Stull and Robert A. Stull, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiff-appellant.
Harvey D. Myerson, New York City (Webster, Sheffield, Fleischmann, Hitchcock Brookfield, John E. Gould, and Richard L. Sherman, New York City, on the brief), for defendants-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Edmund L. Palmieri, Judge, in an action for fraud and breach of contract and for violations of § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 of the Rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Before ANDERSON, OAKES and TIMBERS, Circuit Judges.
We affirm on Judge Palmieri's opinion below, 336 F.Supp. 1039, granting summary judgment to the defendants, and add only a brief comment.
In this appeal Wolfson has relied heavily on the point that Judge Palmieri failed to deal specifically with an alleged fraud in the inducement of a January 10, 1969 contract between the parties. But Wolfson had made only incidental and somewhat vague references to this allegation in his lengthy complaint and did not present the issue in the trial court as one having any substance. We are satisfied that Judge Palmieri considered and correctly resolved the claim and properly concluded that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact.