Legal Opinion
Smith v. Sperling
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided May 21, 1956No. 14334PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JAMES ALGER FEE, Circuit Judge.
This is a stockholders’ derivative suit, which was brought ostensibly for the benefit of Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc., a Delaware corporation, by plaintiff Smith, as Special Administrator of the Estate of Edward S. Birn, deceased, owner of 400 shares of stock therein. Yhe corporation was joined as a defendant with two of its directors and another Delaware corporation, United States Pictures, Inc., along with one Sperling, a director of the latter. The trial court directed that the questions relating to jurisdiction and limitations should be determined before…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Venner v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- State of Washington v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
- Doctor v. HarringtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Calcote v. Texas Pac. Coal & Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1946
- Central R. Co. of NJ v. MillsSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Smith v. SperlingCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956
- Carr v. Beverly Hills CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956
- Charles B. Smith, as Special Administrator of the Estate of Edward S. Birn, Deceased v. Milton SperlingCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960