Joseph C. Canizaro, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Kohlmeyer & Company, Defendant-appellee, 512 F.2d 484 (5th Cir. 1975)

 Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - 512 F.2d 484 (5th Cir. 1975) May 2, 1975

Peter J. Butler, New Orleans, La., Paul E. Hurley, P. J. Stakelum, III, New Orleans, La., for plaintiff-appellant.

Charles Kohlmeyer, Jr., Charles E. Hamilton, III, Earl S. Eichin, Jr., New Orleans, La., Roger L. Waldman, New York City, for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Before THORNBERRY, SIMPSON and RONEY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The appellant, Canizaro, brought suit in the Southern District of New York against a number of New York defendants for damages for claimed violations of Section 12(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, Title 15 U.S.C. § 77l(2), and 17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5 promulgated pursuant to § 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Title 15 U.S.C. § 78j, and on various state law principles in connection with a purchase by Canizaro of certain securities in May 1970. A New Orleans, Louisiana based registered broker-dealer, Kohlmeyer & Company (Kohlmeyer), the appellee herein, served as Canizaro's broker or seller in the actual consummation of the purchase, and was named as a defendant in addition to the New York defendants. Upon Kohlmeyer's motion, the case against the appellee was severed and transferred to the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Following a full-scale trial on the merits, the district court found for the defendant-appellee on all counts1  and entered the judgment appealed from. For reasons well stated by the trial court we agree that the plaintiff-appellant Canizaro failed to prove a violation of either § 12(2) or of Rule 10b-5, or to prove a case under applicable Louisiana law.

The judgment below was right, and is in all respects

Affirmed.

 1

The Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of the trial court are reported at 370 F. Supp. 282

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.