Rosenfeld v. Fairchild Engine & Airplane Corp.
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHooley, J.
Motion for judgment by defendants Wilson and McComas pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, dismissing the complaint herein upon the ground that the answers of said defendants each sets forth a defense, viz. — a general release, which is sufficient as a matter of law and which is founded upon facts established prima facie by documentary evidence.
This action is a stockholder’s derivative suit for the benefit of the corporate defendant, Fairchild Engine and Airplane Corp. The complaint charges improper expenditure of corporate funds by the directors in connection with a proxy…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Milks v. McIverNew York Court of Appeals · 1934
- Potter v. WalkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
- Besseliew v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Bee v. CooperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Braswell v. . MorrowSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.