Legal Opinion

Bridgers v. . Staton

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 4, 1909PublishedCited by 11 opinions

ActioN from Edgecombe, beard upon pleadings and affidavits before W. R. Allen, J3.0 November, 1908. Plaintiff appealed.

1Opinion of the CourtClark, C. J.

This is an action brought under Revisal, secs. 1188 and 1189, and seeks a mandamus to compel a reconvening of a meeting of the stockholders of a private corporation and an injunction against certain stockholders voting at such meeting.

The plaintiff complained, among other things, that he and the defendants had “pooled their stock,” which was a majority of the stock, under an agreement, to last ten years, that the directors were to be divided between them, and that the defendants had violated their agreement. Such agreement was against public policy and void, and his Honor properly held that…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Harvey v. Linville Improvement Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
  2. Howe v. Harper.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
  3. Board of County Commissioners v. CandlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Wilson v. McClennySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  2. Hexter v. Columbia Baking Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1929
  3. Lanier v. . Pullman Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
  4. Bridgers v. First National BankSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
  5. Sagness v. Farmers Co-Operative Creamery Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1940

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API