Legal Opinion
Winkelman v. General Motors Corporation
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided November 4, 1942PublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LEIBELL, District Judge.
The present application involves a proposed compromise of this consolidated stockholders’ derivative action. Rule 23 (c), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section, 723c. On April 10th, after a lengthy trial and the consideration of voluminous briefs and findings of fact, I filed my decision herein, together with an opinion. D.C., 44 F.Supp. 960. The various issues, concerning the adoption and administration of the General Motors Corporation bonus plans, were separately discussed and determined. I held that the bonus plans had been legally adopted…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Schmidt v. Merchants Despatch Transportation Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1936
- Rogers v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Cohen v. YoungCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1942
- Everett v. PhillipsNew York Court of Appeals · 1942
- Winkelman v. General Motors CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1942
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Shlensky v. DorseyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,062 C. Robert Young, National Bankers Life Insurance Co. v. Lawrence G. Katz, Movants-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1971
- Pennsylvania Ass'n for Retarded Children v. PennsylvaniaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1972
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 99,484 John F. Maher v. Zapata Corporation v. William Maldonado, Objector-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
- Glicken v. BradfordDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1964
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.