Filed: Jul. 16, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 13-13242 Date Filed: 07/16/2014 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 13-13242 _ D.C. Docket No. 8:11-cv-00933-SDM-AEP SALIH HALUK ERBEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus RAYMOND JAMES EUROPEAN HOLDINGS, INC., RAYMOND JAMES INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS, INC., RAYMOND JAMES FINANCIAL, INC., Defendants-Appellees. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (July 16, 2014) Before WILSON, PRYOR, and ROSEN
Summary: Case: 13-13242 Date Filed: 07/16/2014 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 13-13242 _ D.C. Docket No. 8:11-cv-00933-SDM-AEP SALIH HALUK ERBEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus RAYMOND JAMES EUROPEAN HOLDINGS, INC., RAYMOND JAMES INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS, INC., RAYMOND JAMES FINANCIAL, INC., Defendants-Appellees. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida _ (July 16, 2014) Before WILSON, PRYOR, and ROSENB..
More
Case: 13-13242 Date Filed: 07/16/2014 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 13-13242 ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 8:11-cv-00933-SDM-AEP SALIH HALUK ERBEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus RAYMOND JAMES EUROPEAN HOLDINGS, INC., RAYMOND JAMES INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS, INC., RAYMOND JAMES FINANCIAL, INC., Defendants-Appellees. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida ________________________ (July 16, 2014) Before WILSON, PRYOR, and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Salih Haluk Erben appeals the summary judgment in favor of the defendants, Raymond James European Holdings, Inc., Raymond James Case: 13-13242 Date Filed: 07/16/2014 Page: 2 of 2 International Holdings, Inc., and Raymond James Financial, Inc., on the claim of negligent supervision and appeals the judgment as a matter of law in favor of the defendants on the claim of breach of contract under an alter ego theory of liability. After oral argument, careful review of the record, and thorough consideration of the briefs, we conclude that the district court committed no reversible error. We affirm. 2
