Legal Opinion
Birnbaum v. Birrell
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided December 13, 1948No. Civ. No. 43-725PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
COXE, District Judge.
These are motions by various defendants to require plaintiffs to file a further amended complaint stating in separate counts the facts with respect to each alleged separate transaction or occurrence; to dismiss the amended complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; to file a more definite statement with respect to numerous allegations in the amended complaint; to strike out certain allegations as redundant, immaterial, etc., and to dismiss the action as to certain defendants for improper venue.
The action is a stockholders’ derivative action…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Neirbo Co. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Orange Theatre Corp. v. Rayherstz Amusement Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1944
- Original Ballet Russe, Ltd. v. Ballet Theatre, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- Goldstein v. GroesbeckCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- Hoiness v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Willoughby v. Sinclair Oil & Gas Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1951
- Industrial Waxes, Inc. v. International Railways of Central AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1961
- Dowd v. Front Range Mines, Inc.District Court, D. Colorado · 1965
- Minnesota Chippewa Tribe v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1986
- Bartner v. DebiasseDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1957
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.