Gasper v. Louisiana Stadium & Exposition District

How later courts describe this case

• concluding that claims filed by “persons who were allegedly induced by fraud to purchase [the Debtor’s] stock” should be subordinated
• holding that the 37 C.F.R. § 1.14(e) provisions for disclosure do not vitiate the applicability of exemption (b)(3)
• finding that actions of officers of entity that had its genesis in state law and was at time of suit still governed by state statute were taken "under color of state law".
• noting but not reaching district court's disallowance of bankruptcy claims to the extent made on behalf of a class of claimants
• noting but not reaching district court’s disal-lowance of bankruptcy claims to the extent made on behalf of a class of claimants
• relying on the principle of equitable subordination in bankruptcy in order to subordinate to the claims of general creditors the claims of stockholders who asserted they were fraudulently induced to purchase stock
• stockholders whose claims were not purely for the return of their equity investment were treated as creditors.
• Commissioner’s order refusing to consider abandoned patent applications as evidence or prior art is interlocutory