Ryan v. Ryan, No. 16-3149 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseStacy Ryan filed suit against Streck, Inc. and Connie Ryan, alleging violations of section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5, and multiple violations of Nebraska law in connection with Streck's redemption of Stacy's stock. The Eighth Circuit held that the district court did not err in granting defendants' motion to dismiss because Stacy did not plausibly plea that defendants' wrongful actions caused her loss. Furthermore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to alter or amend the judgment. However, the district court erred in denying Stacy's Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) motion. Therefore, the court remanded for further consideration of the motion to alter or amend presented newly discovered evidence warranting alteration of the order dismissing her breach of contract claim.
Court Description: Loken, Author, with Wollman and Melloy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Securities. In action alleging defendants self-dealing and manipulation of a stock evaluation process, among other claims, violated Nebraska and federal securities law, as well as their fiduciary duty to plaintiff, the district court did not err in granting defendants' motion to dismiss as plaintiff did not plausibly plea that the defendants' wrongful acts caused her loss; the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to alter or amend the judgment; the district court erred, however, in denying plaintiff's Rule 59(e) motion with respect to a claim of newly-discovered evidence regarding plaintiff's breach of contract claim, and the matter is remanded for further proceeding on this issue.
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.