Legal Opinion

Brodie v. Jordan

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided May 31, 2006No. 04-P-1572PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCypher, J.

This case requires us to assess whether a Superior Court judge properly determined, under the principles stated in Donahue v. Rodd Electrotype Co., 367 Mass. 578 (1975), that the plaintiff, Mary M. Brodie, was “frozen out” of Malden Centerless Grinding, Inc. (Maiden), a close corporation, and that the defendants were in breach of their fiduciary duty to her; and whether she was entitled, as a remedy, to have the defendants purchase the 400 shares of capital stock which she held.

Background. We summarize the essential history from the judge’s comprehensive findings following a jury-waived trial…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Donahue v. Rodd Electrotype Co. of New England, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  2. Wilkes v. Springside Nursing Home, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
  3. New England Trust Co. v. AbbottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
  4. Cardullo v. LandauMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1952
  5. Judge Rotenberg Educational Center, Inc. v. Commissioner of Department of Mental RetardationMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Brodie v. JordanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006
  2. Mastromatteo v. MastromatteoMassachusetts Superior Court · 2006
  3. Murphy v. GreyMassachusetts Superior Court · 2007
  4. Vale v. ValchuisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API