Legal Opinion

Kirschner Brothers Oil, Inc. v. Natomas Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 19, 1986No. Docket Nos. A030416, A029167PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SCOTT, J.

Plaintiffs, all holders of Natomas Company (Natomas) preferred stock, filed similar actions against Natomas, one of its directors, and Diamond Shamrock Corporation. Plaintiffs sought to enjoin a proposed merger, as well as damages for breach of fiduciary duty. After a preliminary injunction was denied, the merger or reorganization was effected. According to its terms, each share of Natomas preferred was exchanged for a share of the preferred stock of another corporation, New Diamond. Subsequently summary judgment was entered in favor of defendants. Plaintiffs, now all former…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1986
  2. Thompson v. County of AlamedaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,956 David Broad v. Rockwell International CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
  4. Jones v. H. F. Ahmanson & Co.California Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Lipson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. NTD Architects v. BakerDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2013
  2. Kevin Risto v. Screen Actors Guild - American Federation of Television and Radio ArtistsDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2021
  3. N. Valley Mall, LLC v. Longs Drug Store S Cal., LLC, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018

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

Powered by the Exa API