Legal Opinion
Fox v. Reich & Tang, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 29, 1982No. 81 Civ. 2602 (KTD)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*95OPINION & ORDER
KEVIN THOMAS DUFFY, District Judge:
Martin Fox, a shareholder of Daily Income Fund, Inc. (“Fund”), sued the Fund, a money market investment company, and Reich & Tang, Inc. (“R&T”), the investment adviser to the Fund, to recover allegedly excessive advisory fees paid by the Fund to R&T. Plaintiff’s derivative suit is premised on Section 36(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, 15 U.S.C. § 80a-35(b), which places a fiduciary duty on an investment adviser with respect to compensation for services.1 R&T is alleged to have breached that duty.
Defendants move to dismiss plaintiff’s…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,005 State Teachers Retirement Board v. Fluor Corporation and Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company, DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
- Burks v. LaskerSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Blau v. Mission Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1954
- Fogel v. ChestnuttCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
- Rose Moses v. C. Rodgers BurginCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1971
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,845 Martin Fox v. Reich & Tang, Inc. And Daily Income Fund, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
- Weiss v. Temporary Investment Fund, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
- Weiss v. Temporary Investment Fund, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982