Legal Opinion

Mintz v. Bohen

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided April 23, 1965PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Seitz, Chancellor:

Plaintiff filed an action against Allis-Chalmers and its directors. It was derivative, at least, in part. It sought damages for past payments by the Company for premiums on individual insurance policies under a corporate retirement income plan. It also sought an injunction against future payments. The complaint, by amendment, alleged that a demand on the board of directors to take appropriate action would have been futile. Service of process was made only on the corporate defendant, which will be referred to as “defendant”.

After the filing of the complaint the defendant…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Rosenthal v. Burry Biscuit Corp.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1949
  2. Kaufman v. ShoenbergCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1952
  3. Kaufman v. ShoenbergCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1952

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Mintz v. BohenCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API