Legal Opinion
Blake v. Blake
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 7, 1996PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
In this shareholder’s derivative action, most of the alleged acts of corporate waste and breach of fiduciary duty occurred prior to August 13, 1975, and accordingly any cause of action with respect thereto is time-barred by the six-year Statute of Limitations (CPLR 213 [7]).
Plaintiff’s allegation that Robert Blake’s purchase of the property, 196-20 Northern Boulevard in Flushing, constituted usurpation of a corporate opportunity is entirely without merit. Plaintiff knew of his mother’s desire to sell the property, and the price she was asking, and did not object to the sale. In fact, he told…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Aronoff v. AlbaneseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- Diamond v. DiamondNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
- Garbarino v. Utica Uniform Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1945
- Garbarino v. Utica Uniform Company, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1946
3Cited by11 opinions
- Golden Pacific Bancorp, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Defendant-Counter-Claimant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Brasseur v. SperanzaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Toscano v. ToscanoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- North Fork Preserve, Inc. v. KaplanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Dinger v. Kling Agency, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.