| |
Reported Cases
Mr. Clary's admission
to the Supreme Court of the United States in 1990 was occasioned
by the filing there of a petition for writ of certiori in the landmark
case of Hocking v. Dubois,
885 F.2d 1449 (9th Cir.1989), cert. denied 494 U.S. 1078 (1990),
a case in which, Mr. Clary distinguished himself as a securities
lawyer in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, where,
as attorney for the plaintiff, he won the appeal there in a 2-1
decision by the initial panel and then in a 6-5 decision after a
subsequent en banc
rehearing. The case established and still stands for liberalized
standards in the Ninth Circuit for the definition of "securities,"
which the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review after Mr. Clary
successfully opposed the petition for writ of certiori there.
Later, Mr. Clary won a case of "first
impression" in the Supreme Court of Nevada in Schwartz
v. Wasserburger, 117 Nev. 703,
30 P.3d 1114 (2001), where the Nevada Supreme Court, reversing a
lower court decision, established that Nevada's 6-year statute of
limitations for written contracts runs from the "actual breach"
rather than the "anticipatory breach."
An article written by Mr. Clary, entitled
"Are
You Practicing Securities Law and Don't Know It? If you don't know,
you probably are?" was
published in the December 2007 edition of the magazine. The Communique.
The magazine is the official journal of the Association, and the
December 2007 monthly edition featured lawyers' articles on business
law. Although by its title the article was directed to lawyers who
may not be familiar with the securities laws, it is also instructive
to prospective clients regarding the legal requirements for compliance
with both the federal and state securities laws.
|
|
Copyright ©2012 Patrick C. Clary, Chartered, A Nevada Professional Corporation
8670 West Cheyenne Avenue, Suite 120 Las Vegas, Nevada 89129
Phone: 702-382-0813 | Fax: 702-382-7277 | E-Mail: PatClary@PatClaryLaw.com |
|
|
