Globus v. Law Research Service, Inc.

holding that “[t]here can be no question that a person ‘endeavors’ to obstruct justice when he arranges to have a prospective government witness murdered.” | failure of government to comply with disclosure requirements of Jenck's Act, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3500, held harmless error | failure of government to comply with disclosure requirements of Jenck’s Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3500, held harmless error | “consistent verdicts are not, in themselves, necessary attributes of a valid judgment [in a civil action]” | no reasonable expectation that placement of telephone call or particular number called will not be recorded | underwriter could not recover from issuer under indemnification agreement where jury had found underwriter guilty of misconduct involving “actual knowledge”, in violation of § 10(b) | “courts have endeavored to treat the ’33 and ’34 Acts in pari materia and to construe them as a single comprehensive scheme of regulation” | “causation must be proved else defendants could be held liable to all the world” | "causation must be proved else defendants could be held liable to all the world" | as goal of securities laws is to provide prospective investors access to the truth, both issuer and underwriter must investigate facts set forth in a prospectus or offering circular | same argument applied when implying remedy under section 17(a) of the 1933 Act | contractual indemnity provision is against public policy where the party seeking indemnity has actual knowledge of joint tortfeasor’s fraudulent misstatements, and thus “has itself committed a sin graver than ordinary negligence.” | same argument applied when implying remedy under section 17(a) of the 1933 Act | implied warranty of fitness for use under Missouri law | damages must be a proximate result of misleading statements | an action under both § 17 of the 1933 Act and § 10(b) of the 1934 Act, in which the court denied punitive damages under § 17 of the 1933 Act; and Trussell v. United Underwriters, Ltd., 228 F.Supp. 757 (D.C.Colo.1964) (an action under the 1934 Act | concurring opinion of Friendly, J.