Legal Opinion
Boyko v. Reserve Fund, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided September 29, 1975No. 74 Civ. 3419PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GAGLIARDI, District Judge.
This motion to dismiss the complaint raises novel questions concerning the relationship between Section 36(b) of the Company Act of 1940 (“Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 80a-35(b), and Rule 23.1, Fed.R.Civ.P. Investment
The nominal defendant in this derivative action is The Reserve Fund, Inc. (“the Fund”), an open-end diversified investment company principally engaged in the business of investing cash funds from individual investors in marketable obligations of the United States and its agencies, and in depository-type obligations and acceptances of banking institutions.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- In Re Kauffman Mutual Fund Actions. Joseph B. KauffmanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1973
- Anita B. Brody v. Chemical Bank, and Pennsylvania CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,345 Anita B. Brody v. Chemical Bank, and Pennsylvania CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1973
- Galfand v. ChestnuttDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1975
- Brody v. Chemical BankDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1974
3Cited by7 opinions
- Markowitz v. BrodyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1981
- Weiss v. Temporary Investment Fund, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1981
- 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
- Blatt v. Dean Witter Reynolds Intercapital, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1982
- Untermeyer v. Fidelity Daily Income TrustDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1978
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.