noting that the "[w]here permitted by applicable law" language of Rule 10307 prevented tolling of the limitations period where the applicable law, New York C.P.L.R. 204(b), did not permit tolling beyond one year after the NASD determined that arbitration was not warranted
Summary of this case from Friedman v. Wheat First Securities Inc.No. 97-7953.
May 11, 1998.
Appeal from the S.D.N.Y.
Decision without published opinion. Affirmed.
noting that the "[w]here permitted by applicable law" language of Rule 10307 prevented tolling of the limitations period where the applicable law, New York C.P.L.R. 204(b), did not permit tolling beyond one year after the NASD determined that arbitration was not warranted
Summary of this case from Friedman v. Wheat First Securities Inc.Full title:INDIVIDUAL SECURITIES, LTD. v. ROSS
Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Date published: May 11, 1998
Nevertheless, the Court interprets the rule according to its plain language and finds that the limitations…
Rampersad v. Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.The cases Plaintiff proffers in support of the application of section 204(b) do not involve Section 10(b)…