Legal Opinion
Friedman v. Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided December 8, 1966No. 66 Civ. 1080PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MacMAHON, District Judge.
Plaintiffs move to strike a defense that they lack standing and for leave to serve an amended complaint. Defendant Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company (“B&O”) cross-moves for summary judgment.
The complaint purports to assert a class action on behalf of plaintiffs and all other holders of defendant B&O’s convertible 4%% income bonds, due February 1, 2010, and seeks to recover principal and interest on the bonds. The bonds were issued under an indenture which, inter alia, defines and conditions the rights of holders to sue.
The answers of both defendants assert an…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Far East Conference v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. International Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Whitney National Bank in Jefferson Parish v. Bank of New Orleans & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Williams v. Jacksonville Terminal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Gilbertville Trucking Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Cruden v. Bank of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
- Health-Chem Corp. v. BakerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- Vulcan Society of Westchester County v. Fire Department of White PlainsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1979
- Barr v. WUI/TAS, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1975
- Love v. New York State Department of Environmental ConservationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1981
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.