Legal Opinion
Continental Bank & Trust Co. v. W. A. R. Realty Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 5, 1946PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDore, J.
The main issue on the merits in these appeals -is the same, whether under section 20 of the Stock Corporation Law notice to stockholders and affirmative consent of two thirds thereof were mandatory on the sale of a hotel, the last and chief asset of Midtown Enterprises Corporation, formed pursuant, to a plan of- reorganization under the Burchill Act. (Real Property Law, §§ 119-123.)
We have already affirmed an order denying to a stockholder of the corporation an injunction against the sale and dismissing the stockholder’s complaint: (Strauss v. Midtown Enterprises, 270 App. Div. 837.) On that…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Matter of TimmisNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
- Blaustein v. Pan American Petroleum & Transport Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1944
- Matter of Miglietta (2660 Broadway Corp.)New York Court of Appeals · 1942
- Matter of DuerNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
- Strauss v. Midtown Enterprises, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1946
3Cited by6 opinions
- Sutherland v. Kaonohi Ohana, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Warnecke v. Forty Wall Street Building, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1957
- In re HurdNew York Supreme Court · 1957
- Nancy E. Sutherland and Donald Sutherland and Stephen Newnham, Trustees of the Ralph L. Evans Trust v. Kaonohi Ohana, Ltd., Kaonohi Ohana, Ltd. v. Nancy E. SutherlandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Pohs v. Textile Realty Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1960
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.