From our private database of 30,900+ case briefs...
Waltuch v. Conticommodity Services, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
88 F.3d 87 (2d Cir. 1996)
Norton Waltuch (plaintiff) was a silver trader for Conticommodity Services, Inc. (Conti) (defendant). When the silver market crashed, silver speculators brought multiple lawsuits against Waltuch and Conti. All of the suits settled with Conti paying the settlements. As a result of Conti’s payments, Waltuch was dismissed from the suits with no settlement contribution. However, in defending himself in the suits, Waltuch spent approximately $1.2 million out of his own pocket. In addition to the civil suits, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) brought an enforcement proceeding against Waltuch. That proceeding settled as well, with Waltuch agreeing to a fine and a six-month ban on trading. Waltuch spent an additional $1 million in defending himself in the CFTC proceeding. Waltuch brought suit against Conti, seeking indemnification of his various legal expenses. Waltuch first claimed that a provision in Conti’s articles of incorporation categorically required Conti to indemnify him. Conti claimed that a Delaware law barred the claim by allowing indemnification only if the corporate officer acted in good faith, which Waltuch did not establish. Waltuch’s second claim was that a different provision of that Delaware law required Conti to indemnify him because he was “successful on the merits or otherwise” in the civil suits (this statute did not apply to the CFTC proceeding). Conti responded that its settlement payments were partially on Waltuch’s behalf so he was not actually successful in the suits. The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York agreed with Conti on both claims. Waltuch appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Jacobs, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 553,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 553,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 30,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.