Legal Opinion

Van Aalten v. Mack

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 20, 1959PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Aron Steuer,, J.

Upon the call of the calendar plaintiffs had the case marked discontinued. Defendants now seek by this motion to have the disposition changed so that the action may be held in abeyance rather than terminated; or that the discontinuance be with prejudice.

The action is a stockholders ’ representative action. It appears that another action by one of the same stockholders is pending in Delaware. This court has stayed the prosecution of the Delaware action during the pendency of this action. The object of discontinuing, as frankly admitted by plaintiffs is to be rid of this stay…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Clarke v. GreenbergNew York Court of Appeals · 1947
  2. Paramount Pictures, Inc. v. BlumenthalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939
  3. Getz v. Harry Silverstein, Inc.City of New York Municipal Court · 1954
  4. Stanford v. Cayuga Linen & Cotton Mills, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1939
  5. Stanford v. LinenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1941

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Schultz v. KobusAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962
  2. Bieniek v. Miller Drug Stores, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1966
  3. In re Jose T.New York City Family Court · 1984
  4. Lascaris v. DownsNew York Family Court · 1975
  5. Mercier v. MercierNew York Supreme Court · 1980

1 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