Legal Opinion
Ripley v. Colwell
New York Supreme Court
Decided March 11, 1954PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFrank, J.
This is a stockholder’s derivative action. The complaint alleges that a resolution of the directors, by the terms of which the individual plaintiff and the defendant Storer receive 40% of the corporation’s gross income over a certain sum, is invalid and wasteful of corporate assets.
Whether the resolution be regarded as a bonus incentive plan or as a method of siphoning corporate profits is of no moment, for in either situation the plaintiffs can be afforded no relief.
The plaintiff Ripley, a stockholder and director, voted for the resolution which he now attacks. He cannot, therefore, be heard…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Martin v. Niagara Falls Paper Manufacturing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Capitol Wine & Spirit Corp. v. PokrassNew York Court of Appeals · 1951
- Holmes v. CraneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1920
- Markson v. Markson's Furniture Stores, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1935
- Robertson v. SchoonmakerNew York Supreme Court · 1935
3Cited by6 opinions
- Burt v. Irvine Co.California Court of Appeal · 1965
- Yokochi v. YoshimotoHawaii Supreme Court · 1960
- Ripley v. StorerNew York Supreme Court · 1955
- Northridge Cooperative Section No. 1, Inc. v. 32nd Avenue Construction Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1955
- Williams v. RobinsonNew York Supreme Court · 1957
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.