Legal Opinion
Varanelli v. Wood
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 25, 1949PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GODDARD, District Judge.
These two motions, (1) by defendants, John M. Hancock and S. J. Weinberg, to dismiss the complaint for failure to comply with Rule 23(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A.; and (2) by defendant, Sears, Roebuck and Co., to require, pursuant to Section 61-b of the New York General Corporation Law, the plaintiff to furnish security for the reasonable expenses including attorneys’ fees which have been and may be incurred in connection with the action.
The action is a stockholder’s derivative suit against the officers, directors of Sears, Roebuck and Co.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Angel v. BullingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Hawes v. OaklandSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- David Lupton's Sons Co. v. Automobile Club of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1948
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- S. Harold Levitt v. Edward C. Johnson, 2dCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1964
- Mayer v. AdamsSupreme Court of Delaware · 1958
- Jewish Consumptives Relief Soc. v. RothfeldDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1949