People ex rel. Onderdonk v. Mott
New York Supreme Court
Motion for a mandamus, on notice.—This was a motion by relator, for a mandamus to the defendant as secretary of the North Hempstead and Flushing Turnpike Road and Bridge Company, to require him to exhibit to the relator, the books and papers belonging to the company.
Read the full summary
Motion for a mandamus, on notice.—This was a motion by relator, for a mandamus to the defendant as secretary of the North Hempstead and Flushing Turnpike Road and Bridge Company, to require him to exhibit to the relator, the books and papers belonging to the company. The relator was a director of the company, and on the 14th of June last, demanded by notice in writing and personally, of defendant an examination of certain books and papers belonging to the company, which defendant refused, by replying he preferred not to do so at present, he thought he had good reasons for refusing. On further…
1Opinion of the Court
Beardsley, Justice.
Decided, that a director, or a corporator, had a right at all reasonable times, to examine the books, records, and papers of the company. Mandamus granted.
2Cited by8 opinions
- Matter of SteinwayNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- MATTER OF COHEN v. Cocoline Prods.New York Court of Appeals · 1955
- People ex rel. McInnes v. Columbia Paper Bag Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
- In re SteinwayAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- People ex rel. McInnes v. Columbia Paper Bag Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.