Legal Opinion
Tanzer v. Huffines
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided August 24, 1970No. Civ. A. No. 3166PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LATCHUM, District Judge.
Plaintiff has moved for an order taxing the costs and expenses of the receivership pendente lite of the B.S.F. Company (“B.S.F.”) against the three named individual defendants — Victor Muscat, Edward Krock and Robert H. Huffines, Jr.1
Plaintiff, a stockholder of B.S.F., a diversified management investment company,2 brought this derivative action against Defiance Industries, Inc. (“Defiance”), B.S.F. and the individual defendants. The complaint charges that the individual defendants by virtue of their control of Defiance, which in turn controlled B.S.F.,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Trustees v. GreenoughSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Newton v. Consolidated Gas Co. of NYSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Burnrite Coal Briquette Co. v. RiggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Deborah Tanzer v. Robert H. Huffines, Jr., Edward Krock, Victor Muscat, Defiance Industries, Inc., and B. S. F. Company. B. S. F. CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1969
- Davis v. DuncanUnited States Circuit Court · 1884
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Newton v. Hornblower, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1978
- Lawson v. Baltimore Paint and Chemical CorporationDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1972