Short v. Belleville Shoe Manufacturing Co.
Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.
Status
More on how this was screened
Atlantis Group, Inc. v. Rospatch Corp. declined to adopt its federal limitations period for the same securities claim. McCool v. Strata Oil Co. held that the new period does not apply retroactively where plaintiffs relied on the former period; Berning v. A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc. applied that boundary. Congress later set a two-year/five-year limitations period for private securities fraud suits filed from July 30, 2002, in 28 U.S.C. § 1658(b), replacing the one-year/three-year period Short used for those suits; Merck & Co. v. Reynolds applies the new statute without addressing Short. The three judicial treatments are listed below.
31 later cases cite Short v. Belleville Shoe Manufacturing Co.; 31 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.
Relying on Short v. Belleville Shoe Manufacturing Co.?
This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.
Treatments
Limited
-
The Seventh Circuit held that Short's new limitations period did not apply retroactively to plaintiffs who relied on the former Illinois period.
McCool v. Strata Oil Co. · Seventh Circuit · filed
In Short, we applied our new rule to the parties before us, but left open “all questions concerning retroactive application of this decision,” calling the retroactivity of new periods of limitations “a question of some subtlety.” Short, 908 F.2d at 1389-90. ... We conclude that there is adequate evidence on the record to show the plaintiffs’ reliance on the old rule. The Illinois statute of limitations applies to this case.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener → -
The Seventh Circuit declined to apply Short retroactively to bar the Bernings' securities claim.
Berning v. A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc. · Seventh Circuit · filed
In other words, the brokers would have us determine that the District Court erred in initially holding that Short ought not be applied retroactively in this case. We decline so to do. ... We conclude, therefore, that the Illinois statute of limitations applies to this case.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
Declined to follow
-
The district court declined to adopt Short's uniform federal limitations period for the securities claims before it.
Atlantis Group, Inc. v. Rospatch Corp. · Western District of Michigan · filed
Three circuits have adopted a uniform federal statute of limitations — one year from discovery and in any event no later than three year after the alleged securities violation. See Ceres Partners v. Gel Associates, 918 F.2d 349 (2d Cir.1990); Short v. Belleville Shoe Mfg. Co., 908 F.2d 1385 (7th Cir.), petition for cert. filed, No. 90-526 (Sept. 26, 1990); In re Data Access Systems Securities Litigation, 843 F.2d 1537 (3rd Cir.1988), cert. denied sub. nom., Vitiello v. I. Kahlowsky & Co., 488 U.S. 849, 109 S.Ct. 131, 102 L.Ed.2d 103 (1988). ... This court has previously declined an invitation to follow the circuits that have adopted a uniform federal statute of limitations in section 10(b) cases.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener →
Does this case still carry your argument?
Describe your facts. Ezel reads Short v. Belleville Shoe Manufacturing Co. and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace