Law v. Alexander Smith & Sons Carpet Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Per curiam
This is a derivative stockholder’s action. Defendants ’ motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that plaintiff lacked legal capacity to sue was directed against the pleading as a whole. The proof adduced by plaintiff sufficiently establishes the allegation of her complaint to the effect that at all the times mentioned therein, and her claim that at the time of the commencement of the suit, she was the equitable and beneficial owner of 3,250 shares of the capital stock of Alexander Smith & Sons Carpet Company. This proof is to be found in the terms of a settlement agreement between…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Willcox v. Harriman Securities CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1933
- Miller v. MillerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939
- Miller v. MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
- Baum v. SporborgAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911
- Litwin v. AllenNew York Supreme Court · 1938