6th Cir. Published Decisions Week of Mar. 12 - 16, 2007 (3 Ky Decisions)

Opinion	Pub Date	Short Title/District
07a0097p.06	2007/03/13	Caremark Inc v. Goetz     Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville Third party reimbursement Medicaid reimbursement and insurance plans
07a0098p.06	2007/03/14	Boykin v. Van Buren Township     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit 1983 action and false arrest over $5.00 shoplifting
07a0099p.06	2007/03/14	Dixon v. Gonzales, et al     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit Administrartive law: exhaustion of remedies and denied reinstatement as FBI agent
07a0100p.06	2007/03/15	USA v. Bolden     Western District of Tennessee at Memphis Criminal sentencing and Booker enhancement
07a0101p.06	2007/03/16	Stockman v. Oakcrest Dent, et al     Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit FRE 408 and admissibility of settlement offer
07a0102p.06	2007/03/16	Brown v. Earthboard Sports     Eastern District of Kentucky at Covington Preemption, National Security Markets Improvement Act and Kentucky Blue Sky Laws BOGGS, Chief Judge. Plaintiff-Appellant Clinton Brown, a wealthy businessman, made a risky investment in the securities of a small privately-held California company called Earthboard Sports USA (“Earthboard”). He was induced to embark on such a course of action by the “tip” he had received from Defendant-Appellee Jeffrey Vaughn, an acquaintance and financial advisor who considered Brown to be a prospective client, that a large public company was about to acquire Earthboard on extremely, even ridiculously, favorable terms. However, the promised acquisition turned out to be an entirely fictitious creation of Earthboard’s president, one Hugh Jeffreys, a felon. When the truth was finally revealed, Brown and many others lost their investments. Brown then sued Earthboard, Jeffreys, Vaughn, and Vaughn’s employer Lincoln Financial Advisors Corp. (“Lincoln”) in federal court, claiming a variety of federal and state securities violations. The district court entered default judgment against Earthboard and Jeffreys. Subsequently, the district court granted summary judgment in favor of Vaughn and Lincoln. Relevant to the appeal before us now, the district court held that (1) Brown’s complaint that the parties had sold him unlawfully unregistered shares under Kentucky’s Blue Sky law was preempted by the National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-290, 110 Stat. 3416 (“NSMIA”), because the securities had been sold “pursuant to” a valid federal registration exemption; and (2) Brown did not adduce sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact with respect to two vital elements of a securities fraud suit: scienter and loss causation. Brown filed a timely notice of appeal. For the reasons stated below, we reverse the district court with respect to the claims against Vaughn, but affirm summary judgment in favor of Lincoln.
07a0103p.06	2007/03/16	In Re: Renato Acosta v.     Eastern District of Kentucky at Covington Pro se appeal regarding multiple motions to vacate sentence
07a0104p.06	2007/03/16	Crosby v. Rohm & Haas Co     Western District of Kentucky at Louisville ERISA disclosure requirements SUTTON, Circuit Judge. Amanda Crosby filed this lawsuit against Rohm and Haas under the Employee Retirement and Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., seeking to recover benefits allegedly owed to her as a beneficiary of her father’s life insurance policy with the company. She also sought monetary penalties from the company because it allegedly violated ERISA’s disclosure requirements. The district court granted summary judgment for Rohm and Haas, reasoning that Crosby received all of the life insurance benefits she was due and that the company’s conduct did not warrant monetary penalties. We affirm.