Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Nichols v. Alker

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided February 14, 1956No. 39, Docket 23580Published

1ConcurrenceFrank, Circuit Judge

I concur in the decision, but I think my colleagues travel the wrong road to reach the correct conclusion.

1. Of course, the “enforcing court” (i. e. the court which enforced the S. E. C. order approving the plan) had exclusive jurisdiction of everything relating to the plan and to the allocation of the assets of the reorganized company, i. e. the allocation of securities issued pursuant to the plans. Of course, too, that court’s injunction prohibited the plaintiffs from taking any steps whatever, except in the enforcing court, to obtain a larger share of the assets of that company. For that…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Lawlor v. National Screen Service Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
  2. Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. BoydSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  3. Bruszewski v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1950
  4. Subin v. GoldsmithCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
  5. Verplanck v. . Van BurenNew York Court of Appeals · 1879

14 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