Legal Opinion · Dissent

Greenfield v. Denner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 1, 1958Published

1Dissent

Breitel, J. (dissenting).

I find it necessary to dissent from the conclusions reached and the reasoning adopted by the majority.

*269In the first place, if the first cause of action is for damage to plaintiff’s “investment”, then, by definition, all damage to the investment is damage to the corporation, and the derivative cause of action in the complaint provides unrestricted scope to assess and recover that damage. This seems to be the uniform teaching of the authorities (Gordon v. Elliman, 306 N. Y. 456, 466; Kavanaugh v. Commonwealth Trust Co., 181 N. Y. 121, 124; Niles v. New York Cent. &…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Kavanaugh v. . Kavanaugh Knitting Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1919
  2. Niles v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1903
  3. Kavanaugh v. . Commonwealth Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1905
  4. von Au v. MagenheimerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
  5. Gordon v. EllimanNew York Court of Appeals · 1954

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API