Legal Opinion

Converse v. United Shoe Machinery Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided September 5, 1911PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.

This is a bill in equity to compel the Shoe Machinery Company and the individual defendants to account for alleged wrongdoing as stockholders in and officers and directors of the Goddu Sons Metal Fastening Company, in the manage*540ment and conduct of the business and property of said company. The Goddu Company is made a party defendant. The defendants severally demurred, and the case was thereupon reserved* for the full court; if the demurrers are sustained the bill is to be dismissed; if overruled the case is to be remanded to the Superior Court and the defendants are to answer and such other…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Converse v. United Shoe Machinery Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Pepper v. LittonSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  2. Bartlett v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1915
  3. Hayden v. Perfection Cooler Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  4. Andersen v. Albert & J. M. Anderson Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
  5. Turner v. United Mineral Lands Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941

8 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