Legal Opinion
Klum v. Clinton Trust Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided May 1, 1944PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMcLaughlin, J.
Plaintiff’s complaint in this derivative stockholder’s suit sets forth five causes of action based on two sets of so-called “ free rides ” in the stock market in 1936 and 1937, given by the bank to Charles H. Mullens. This was accomplished by means of the bank’s purchasing certain stocks and carrying them for his account with the understanding that, while he would profit by any gains, he would not be required to make good losses.
The defendants, other than Clinton Trust Company, move to dismiss the complaint because (1) plaintiff lacks legal capacity *341to sue, and (2) legal insufficiency is…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Isaac v. MarcusNew York Court of Appeals · 1932
- Lazarus v. Metropolitan Elevated Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1895
- Piccard v. Sperry CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1941
- Perrott v. United States Banking CorporationDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1944
- Weinberger v. QuinnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1942
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Bangor Punta Operations, Inc. v. Bangor & Aroostook RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Rosenthal v. Burry Biscuit Corp.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1948
- Noel Associates, Inc. v. MerrillNew York Supreme Court · 1944
- Bankers Nat. Corp. v. BarrDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1945
- Loew v. Interlake Iron Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1944
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.