Bernard v. Wassel and Sevy Wassel, His Wife, Plaintiffs-appellees, v. Edward M. Eglowsky, Stephen H. Stillerman, Appellants, v. Arnold Goldman, and Central Trust Company, Defendants-appellees, 542 F.2d 1235 (4th Cir. 1976)
Annotate this CaseEdward M. Eglowsky (Stephen H. Stillerman, on brief), pro se.
Francis S. Brocato, Baltimore, Md., for appellees Bernard V. and Sevy Wassel.
Robert B. Haldeman, Baltimore, Md. (Cleaveland D. Miller, Semmes, Bowen & Semmes, Baltimore, Md., on brief), for appellee Central Trust Co.
Arnold Goldman, pro se.
Before WINTER and CRAVEN, Circuit Judges, and FIELD, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
In an exhaustive opinion, the district judge granted judgment to plaintiffs Bernard V. Wassel and Sevy Wassel against defendants Edward M. Eglowsky and Stephen H. Stillerman, and he gave Eglowsky and Stillerman judgment for contribution against Arnold Goldman, a third-party defendant, exonerating Central Trust Company, another third-party defendant. Wassel v. Eglowsky, 399 F. Supp. 1330 (D. Md. 1975). Plaintiffs' recovery was grounded upon defendants' violation of § 12(1) of the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. § 77l (1) (selling unregistered securities).
Defendants Eglowsky and Stillerman appeal, assigning numerous grounds for reversal. We find none of them meritorious, and we affirm on the opinion of the district court, adopting it as our own with regard to the violation of § 12(1) of the Act and defendants' right to contribution from Goldman.
AFFIRMED.
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.
