father’s intent that the uncles’ and cousin’s stock return to the corporation; his father’s intent that control pass to the plaintiff and his brothers; and his family’s objections to his sale of the stock in 1972. Maggio, 824 F.2d at 128-29. 11 . See supra fn. 8. 12 . Sally Arthur stated that I advised plaintiff to wait until 1981, at which time the corporations would probably have the necessary funds to entertain [the bid/buy-back or corporate repurchase alternatives] in view of an anticipated significant increase in RWC ground lease payments. Moreover, I pointed out that increased RWC income would permit correspondingly increased dividends to shareholders. Sally Arthur Aff. ¶ 7. 13 .See Norris v. Wirtz, 818 F.2d 1329, 1334 (7th Cir.1987), petition for cert, filed, September 4, 1987 (<HOLDING>). 14 . Plaintiff claims the conversion occurred
holding that 18 year old girl inexperienced in business matters still held to reasonable person standard and would need to exercise due diligence holding that inquiry notice triggers an investors duty to exercise reasonable diligence and that the  statute of limitations period begins to run once the investor in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered the facts underlying the alleged fraud recognizing implied obligation to use reasonable diligence holding that defendant failed to exercise due diligence by neglecting to use a thirtysixhour window to secure an affidavit holding that equitable tolling is applicable only in extreme cases noting that courts have been generally unforgiving when a late filing is due to the failure to exercise due diligence in preserving legal rights