John A. Mansour v. Morgan Stanley — 2d Cir. (Oct 27, 2026)
The Second Circuit considers an investor's claims over money and securities allegedly diverted from his Morgan Stanley accounts. John Mansour says stock worth millions left through entries marked deliver, without proceeds returning to him, and that later trading concealed what happened. The challenged activity dates to the late nineteen-nineties and early two-thousands; Mansour sued in 2024 after a later forensic review. Federal law generally bars basing civil racketeering, or RICO, claims on securities fraud. The judge applied that bar and found the state-law claims too late. A predicate act is an underlying offense used to support a racketeering claim. For Mansour, Bathaee will argue that theft need not involve a securities sale and that concealment excuses the delay. Mark Emery will defend both dismissal grounds for Morgan Stanley. Inquiry notice means warning signs that can trigger a duty to investigate, even before the investor knows the full alleged scheme.
John A. Mansour v. Morgan Stanley (No. 26-600) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, argued October 27, 2026.
- 0:00Introduction