Legal Opinion
Laurenzano v. Einbender
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided November 29, 1966No. 65 C 1285PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM and ORDER
DOOLING, District Judge.
The allegations of the amended complaint, seeking to rescind two transactions, would, if true, appear to state a case under state law for breach of fiduciary duty owed to a corporation. The defendants, in effecting the formal corporate action involved in completing the transactions, solicited the votes of the corporation’s shareholders through a proxy statement alleged to have been false and misleading, and the defendants allegedly caused the corporation, relying on the proxy material, to acquire a large amount of its own stock at an inflated cost.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- J. I. Case Co. v. BorakSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Perry O. Hooper, as Trustee in Bankruptcy of Consolidated American Industries, Inc. v. Mountain States Securities CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1960
- List v. Fashion Park, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1965
- Hoover v. AllenDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1965
- Barnett v. Anaconda CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1965
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,853 John Schlick v. Penn-Dixie Cement CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
- Knute Swanson v. American Consumer Industries, Inc., United States Cold Storage Corporation and Peoria Service CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1969
- Crane Co. v. Westinghouse Air Brake Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1969
- Gerstle v. Gamble-Skogmo, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1969
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.