Bernert v. Multnomah Lbr. & Box Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBelt, J.
At common law a stockholder unquestionably had the right to inspect corporate books and records when he proceeded with a proper motive: Guthrie v. Harkness, 199 U. S. 148 (50 L. Ed. 130, 4 Ann. Cas. 433, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 4, see, also, Rose’s U. S. Notes); State ex rel. Thiele v. Cities Service Co., 31 Del. 514 (115 Atl. 773, 22 A. L. R. 8); State ex rel. Costello v. Middlesex Banking Co., 87 Conn. 483 (88 Atl. 861); Wilson v. Mackinaw State Bank, 217 Ill. App. 494; Venner v. Chicago City Ry. Co., 246 Ill. 170 (92 N. E. 643, 138 Am. St. Rep. 229, 20 Ann. Cas. 607); 4 Fletcher’s Cyclopedia…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Union Pacific Railroad v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Guthrie v. HarknessSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- United States Ex Rel. Turner v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- People Ex Rel. Wood v. Board of Assessors & Collector of TaxesNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Foster v. WhiteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Campbell v. Ford Industries, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1976
- McDonough v. National Hospital Ass'nOregon Supreme Court · 1930
- Meyer v. Ford Industries, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1975
- Dines v. HarrisSupreme Court of Colorado · 1930
- Rosentool v. Bonanza Oil and Mine Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1960
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.