Legal Opinion

Hochman v. Mortgage Finance Corp.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 31, 1927No. Appeal, 44PublishedCited by 85 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Kephart,

Beitel, a minority stockholder and a director of defendant corporation, filed a bill, under an agreement with plaintiff and several others, asking for the appointment of a receiver, alleging certain acts of mismanagement. The prayer was refused, and no appeal was taken. Thereafter, plaintiff, another director and stockholder, filed the present bill, joining the other directors as parties defendant with the corporation. The averments and prayers in both bills were substantially the same. The court below held that all the material issues of fact had been…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. New Orleans v. Citizens' BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  2. McDonald v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
  3. Marsh v. PierSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1833
  4. State Hospital for Criminal Insane v. Consolidated Water Supply Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  5. Green v. BogueSupreme Court of the United States · 1895

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by85 opinions

  1. Bearoff v. Bearoff Bros., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  2. Stevenson v. SilvermanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  3. Helmig v. Rockwell Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  4. Callery v. Blythe Township Municipal AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  5. Wallace's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934

80 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