Freeman v. Complex Computing Co.

Freeman v. Complex Computing Co. (1997)
the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Syllabus
853889Freeman v. Complex Computing Co. — Syllabus1997the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Court Documents
Opinion of the Court
Concurrence/Dissent
Godbold

119 F.3d 1044

DANIEL FREEMAN, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant

v.

COMPLEX COMPUTING COMPANY, INC., Defendant, JASON GLAZIER, Defendant-Appellant, THOMSON TRADING SERVICES, INC., Defendant-Cross-Appellee

No. 96-7850, 96-7870

United States Court of Appeals,
Second Circuit.


March 24, 1997, Argued

August 7, 1997, Decided


RICHARD B. COHEN, Akabas & Cohen, New York, NY (Jeffrey T. Horvath, Akabas & Cohen, New York, NY, of counsel), for Defendant-Appellant.

BARBARA E. OLK, Trief & Olk, New York, NY (Ted Trief, Trief & Olk, New York, NY, of counsel), for Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant.

JAMES F. RITTINGER, Satterlee Stephens Burke & Burke LLP, New York, NY (John L. Slafsky, Satterlee Stephens Burke & Burke LLP, New York, NY, of counsel), for Defendant-Cross-Appellee.

Before: NEWMAN, Chief Judge, MINER and GODBOLD,[1] Circuit Judges. Judge Godbold concurs in part, and dissents in part, in a separate opinion.

Footnotes

edit
  1. The Honorable John C. Godbold of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, sitting by designation.