Petry v. Harwood Electric Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 218, Jan. T., 1924, by defendant, from decree of C. P. No. 5, Pbila. Co., March T., 1920, No. 6397, for plaintiff on bill in equity, in case of Frederick J. Petry et al. v. Harwood Electric Co. Bill for injunction to prevent merger or to compel payment of value of preferred stock as on dissolution. Before Martin, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. Decree for plaintiff. Defendant appealed. Error assigned was, inter alia, decree, quoting it.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Schaffer,
This is a proceeding in equity by certain of the preferred stockholders of defendant company to enjoin its merger with other companies, or, failing that, to obtain the value of their stock. The court refused to enjoin the merger but determined that plaintiffs should be paid the par value of their shares. From the decree entered defendant appeals. In a separate action it was adjudged that plaintiffs were also entitled to payment of accumulated dividends. We dispose of that case in another opinion.
As appellant’s counsel say, the whole issue involved is the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lauman v. Lebanon Valley RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1858
- Barnett v. Philadelphia Market Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
- Pardee v. Harwood Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Childs v. AdamsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
3Cited by26 opinions
- Finch v. Warrior Cement Corp.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1928
- Adams v. United States Distributing Corp.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1945
- Nice Ball Bearing Co. v. Mortgage Building & Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Warren v. Baltimore Transit Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
- Levin v. Pittsburgh United Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.