Central Bank v. First Interstate Bank

Infobox SCOTUS case
Litigants=Central Bank v. First Interstate Bank
ArgueDate=November 30
ArgueYear=1993
DecideDate=April 19
DecideYear=1994
FullName=Central Bank of Denver, N.A., Petitioner v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, N.A. and Jack K. Naber
USVol=511
USPage=164
Citation=114 S.Ct. 1439; 62 USLW 4230; 128 L.Ed.2d. 119
Prior=Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Subsequent=
Holding=A private plaintiff may not maintain an aiding and abetting suit under Section 10(b) of Securities Exchange Act. Court of Appeals reversed.
SCOTUS=1993-1994
Majority=Kennedy
JoinMajority=Rehnquist, O'Connor, Scalia, Thomas
Dissent=Stevens
JoinDissent=Blackmun, Souter, Ginsburg
LawsApplied=Section 10(b) of Securities Exchange Act.

"Central Bank v. First Interstate Bank", 511 U.S. 164 (1994), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held private plaintiff may not maintain aiding and abetting suit under Securities Exchange Act § 10(b).

ee also

*List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 511
*"Stoneridge Investment Partners v. Scientific-Atlanta" (2008)

Further reading

*Cite journal |last=Blackman |first=S. G. |coauthors= |year=1994 |title=An Analysis of Aider and Abettor Liability Under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: "Central Bank of Denver v. First Interstate Bank of Denver" |journal=Connecticut Law Review |volume=27 |issue= |pages=1323 |url= |issn=00106151 |doi=
*Cite journal |last=Hanson |first=Randall K. |coauthors=Rockness, Joanne W. |year=1994 |title=Gaining a New Balance in the Courts: Some of the Liability Burden Has Disappeared – But a Heavy Weight Remains |journal=Journal of Accountancy |volume=178 |issue=2 |pages=40–44 |url= |issn=00218448 |doi=