Hennessy v. Muhleman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendants, Maurice L. Muhleman and others, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the Kings County-Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 24th day of March, 1899, continuing pendente lite a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from making a lease of the entire property of the defendant the Pande Basin Gold Placer Company.
1Opinion of the Court
Woodward, J.:
The question presented upon this appeal is whether, as a matter of law, the board of directors of the defendant Pande Basin Gold Placer Company had the authority and power under its charter to make the lease which is involved in the present controversy. The learned justice at Special Term continued the injunction pending *176the litigation upon the sole ground that the company had no such jiower or authority without the consent' of each and every stockholder, and as the issue of law is thus raised, the defendant company appeals to this court. The facts necessary to be considered in…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Leslie v. . LorillardNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- People v. . BallardNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Holm v. Claus Lipsius Brewing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
3Cited by5 opinions
- People v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United StatesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- Parsons v. Tacoma Smelting & Refining Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1901
- Hearst v. McClellanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
- Hearst v. McClellanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
- Schwab v. E. G. Potter Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908