Legal Opinion

Diamond v. Diamond

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 4, 1954PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDesmond, J.

We agree for affirmance of so much of the judgment appealed from as dismisses the complaint. We strike out, however, so much of that judgment as, on the supposed authority of section 64 of the General Corporation Law, awards to defendant as against Jar old Shops, Inc., $30,000 for her attorneys’ fees and expenses. The effect of that award is this: although plaintiff and defendant, sole stockholders of Jar old Shops, l'nc., were equally guilty of flagrant and continued wrongdoing, as between themselves and as between each of them and their corporation, defendant’s legal expenses will be paid…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kent v. . Quicksilver Mining Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1879
  2. Home Fire Insurance v. BarberNebraska Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Capitol Wine & Spirit Corp. v. PokrassNew York Court of Appeals · 1951
  4. Schwarz v. General Aniline & Film Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1953
  5. Briggs v. EasterlyNew York Supreme Court · 1872

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Grad v. RobertsNew York Court of Appeals · 1964
  2. Sorensen v. the Overland CorporationDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1956
  3. Baker v. Health Management Systems, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2002
  4. Pickett v. PaineSupreme Court of Georgia · 1973
  5. Pinnacle Consultants, Ltd. v. Leucadia National Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2000

28 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