Legal Opinion

Melup v. Rubber Corp. of America

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 5, 1943PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEder, J.

The plaintiff seeks to enjoin the defendants from interfering with him in the discharge of his office as a director of the corporate defendant. In brief, the basis of complaint is that they have obstructed his right of access as a director and stockholder to the corporation’s plant and factory and have threatened to physically eject him if he should come there; that his presence is tolerated provided he is accompanied by an escort; that he is not permitted to freely converse with employees; that anything he might say to or discuss with employees would be overheard by his unwanted accompanist,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hobbs v. Tom Reed Gold Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Wilkins v. M. Ascher Silk Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1923
  3. People Ex Rel. Wilkins v. M. Ascher Silk Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1924
  4. People ex rel. Lehman v. Consolidated Fire Alarm Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911
  5. Bellman v. Standard Match Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1924

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Bowling v. Jack B. Parson CompaniesIdaho Supreme Court · 1990
  2. State v. SEIBERLING RUBBER COMPANYSuperior Court of Delaware · 1961
  3. Baker v. Henry Glass & Co.New York Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Posen v. United Aircraft Products, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Chappel v. Applied Control Systems Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1998

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

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

Powered by the Exa API