Legal Opinion
Hoff v. Sprayregan
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 25, 1971No. 69 Civ. 4717PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FRANKEL, District Judge.
Plaintiffs, presenting themselves as “stockholders,” bring this as a derivative action on behalf of the nominal defendant Technical Tape, Inc. They recount as bases for the suit events beginning in April and extending into August of 1969. The corporation, far from appreciating these efforts ostensibly for its benefit, moves to dismiss the complaint, citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 23.1 and asserting that plaintiffs were not, as the Rule requires, shareholders “at the time of the transaction of which” they complain.1 The resulting dispute requires some description of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Blau v. Mission Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1954
- Maclary v. Pleasant Hills, Inc.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1954
- Pergament v. FrazerDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1949
- Entel v. GuildenDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1963
- Lissauer v. BertlesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1940
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Harff v. KerkorianCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1974
- David B. KUSNER, Appellant, v. FIRST PENNSYLVANIA CORPORATION Et Al.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1976
- Markowitz v. BrodyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1981
- Howe v. Bank of New York MellonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2011
- Kessler v. General Cable Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1979
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.