Legal Opinion
Callaghan v. Bailey
New York Supreme Court
Decided September 16, 1942PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHecht, J.
Defendants move to dismiss the complaint under rules 112 and 113 of the Buies of Civil Practice. Plaintiff William T. Cowin is the solé remaining trustee of The Prudence Company, Inc., appointed on February 1, 1935, by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Hew York at the commencement of a reorganization proceeding pursuant to section 77B of the Bankruptcy Act. (See U. S. Code, tit, 11, § 207.) The defendants were directors or are the representatives of estates of deceased directors of The Prudence Company.
The action was commenced not earlier than October 27, 1937, when…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Buttles v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
- Stephan v. Merchants Collateral Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Devoy v. Superior Fire InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933
- Oppenheimer v. RobertsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
- Rosenkranz v. DoranAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1942
3Cited by2 opinions
- Buchman v. American Foam Rubber CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1965
- Purves v. ICM Artists, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1990