Legal Opinion
Philip Schechtman v. Louis E. Wolfson
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided May 2, 1957No. 147, Docket 24225PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CLARK, Chief Judge.
Plaintiff appeals from the refusal to allow him counsel fees in a shareholders’ derivative action involving somewhat novel circumstances. The action was aimed at interlocking directorates in competing corporations in violation of § 8 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 19. Judge Dimock in a reasoned opinion, D.C.S.D.N.Y., 141 F.Supp. 453, denied recompense to counsel on the ground that the primary remedy was with the Federal Trade Commission, which has jurisdiction under 15 U.S.C. § 21 to issue cease and desist orders in the premises. The judge thought that plaintiff could have…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- United States v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Shielcrawt v. MoffettNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
- Goldstein v. GroesbeckCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- Milgram v. Loew's, Inc. (Hamilton Street Realty Company, Intervenors)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1951
- Decorative Stone Co. v. Building Trades Council of Westchester CountyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Alexander Kahan, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Lewis RosenstielCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
- International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation v. General Telephone & Electronics Corporation and Hawaiian Telephone CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
- Brown v. BullockDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1961
- Knebel v. Capital National Bank in AustinTexas Supreme Court · 1975
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.