Legal Opinion
Glicken v. Bradford
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided February 14, 1964PublishedCited by 53 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RYAN, Chief Judge.
THE COURT: This matter comes before me by order citing all interested parties to show cause under Rule 23 why the proposed stipulation of settlement in this stockholders’ action should not be approved by the Court as fair, adequate and reasonable. Hearings on the proposed settlement were held before me at which I heard argument and received extensive memoranda and numerous exhibits to assist me in determining whether the proposed settlement should be judicially approved.
This stockholders’ derivative and representative suit was filed in March 1961 by Milton and Ida Glicken,…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Brown v. BullockCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- Saxe v. BradyCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1962
- Cohen v. YoungCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1942
- Seitz v. MichelSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
- Masterson v. PergamentCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1953
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by53 opinions
- Mars Steel Corp. v. Continental Bank N.A.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989
- Mabel FLINN, Et Al., Appellants, v. FMC CORPORATION and Local 9 Textile Workers Union of America, AFL-CIO, AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1976
- In Re Warner Communications Securities LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1985
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,038 Randolph Phillips v. John E. Tobin, Ralph K. Gottshall, and Alleghany CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
- Findley v. Blinken (In Re Joint Eastern & Southern District Asbestos Litigation)District Court, S.D. New York · 1991
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.