Morgenstern v. Freudenberg
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHenry Clay Greenberg, J.
This motion presents in a complicated setting the troublesome question of indispensable parties. The guiding principle is easily stated: that in an action for rescission of an agreement, all parties to the agreement are indispensable and must be brought before the court (Galusha v. Galusha, 138 N. Y. 272; Gugel v. Hiscox, 216 N. Y. 145; McKnight v. Bank of N. Y. Trust Co., 254 N. Y. 417). But its application under these rather unusual circumstances is far from simple.
In 1956 plaintiff was a stockholder of a New York corporation with which he had a long-term employment agreement as one of its…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Galusha v. . GalushaNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- McKnight v. Bank of New York & Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1930
- Gugel v. . HiscoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
3Cited by1 opinion
- Finn v. Renyx, Field & Co.New York Supreme Court · 1960