Meredith v. Art Metal Construction Co.
New York Supreme Court
Motion by the defendants Murphy, Jenks and Sirinott, to have the plaintiff’s complaint made more definite and certain.
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
In order to understand the merits of the motion, it becomes necessary to consider the allegations of the complaint and the cause of action set forth, and the general rules of law governing such cases.
The action is brought by the plaintiff, as a stockholder in the Art Metal Construction Company, in behalf of himself and of all other parties in interest who may join in the action, and asks for the appointment of a receiver of said corporation; that the damages sustained by the defendant corporation by reason of the matters and things stated and set forth be ascertained, and that the individual…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Brinkerhoff v. BrownNew York Court of Chancery · 1822
- Loos v. . WilkinsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- O'Connor v. . Virginia Passenger Power Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1906
- Witherbee v. . BowlesNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
- People of the State of N.Y. v. . TweedNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Lesnik v. Public Industrials CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- Fornaseri v. Cosmosart Realty & Building Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1929
- Arnstein v. Bethlehem Steel CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1937
- Tomasello v. TrumpNew York Supreme Court · 1961
- In re the Estate of MechlerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1927