Legal Opinion
Kimmel Sales Corp. v. Lauster
New York Supreme Court
Decided May 6, 1938PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtVan Voorhis, J.
This action is brought by Frederick C. Kimmel, as a stockholder on behalf of Kimmel Sales Corporation, for the cancellation and surrender of certificates representing shares of stock claimed to have been issued to defendants Roy A. Lauster, Charles C. Peck and Harold G. Hutchens for insufficient consideration and a determination that said stock is void in their hands *515under section 69 of the Stock Corporation Law. Further relief incidental thereto is prayed for which will be referred to hereafter.
It is held that the shares issued to Hutchens were for legal services rendered to the corporation,…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Berkey v. Third Avenue Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Scovill v. ThayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Kent v. . Quicksilver Mining Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Dickerman v. Northern Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Holbrook v. . New Jersey Zinc Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1874
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Block v. MageeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Henry H. Bonsall, Jr., and Martha G. Bonsall, C. Jordan Vail and Nancy B. Vail v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
- Lewis v. DanskerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1974
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,409 S. & S. Realty Corp. v. Kleer-Vu Industries, Inc. And Benjamin OsherCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
- Lewis v. DanskerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1973
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.