Legal Opinion
Rogers v. American Can Co.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided September 27, 1960No. Civ. A. 684-58PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HARTSHORNE, District Judge.
Plaintiff, Alexander Rogers, a stockholder of Metal & Thermit Corporation [hereinafter called M & T], brings a derivative action on behalf of M & T against American Can Co. [hereinafter called Canco] and eight of twelve directors of M & T, some of whom are connected with Canco. M & T is also named as a defendant inasmuch as it has been unable to independently pursue this suit on its own behalf, and so that it will be a party to the action and subject to any orders of the Court as a result thereof. No relief is sought against M & T, but solely against the named…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Hawes v. OaklandSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Kiefer-Stewart Co. v. Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- United Copper Securities Co. v. Amalgamated Copper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Continental Securities Co. v. . BelmontNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
- Fleitmann Ex Rel. Stockholders of the Consolidated Street Lighting Co. v. Welsbach Street Lighting Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rogers v. American Can Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1962
- In Re REA Express, Inc., Private Treble Damage, Etc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1976
- In re KMF ActionsDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1972
- Rogers v. American Can CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1962