Schenley Industries, Inc. v. Curtis
Court of Chancery of Delaware
1Opinion of the Court
Bramhall, Justice:
This appeal relates to the timeliness of a written demand for payment of his stock by a stockholder dissenting from a merger of two corporations. The demand was deposited in the mail on the last day of the period within which such demand must be made, but it was not received until the day following.
The pertinent facts are as follows:
Park & Tilford Distillers Corporation was merged into Schenley Industries, Inc., both corporations of the State of Delaware, under §253 of the Delaware Corporation Law, 8 Del.C. § 253. This section provides, in part, that a dissenting stockholder…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Chicago Corp. v. MundsCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1934
- In re Northeastern Water Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1944
3Cited by1 opinion
- Schenley Industries, Inc. v. CurtisSupreme Court of Delaware · 1959