Legal Opinion
Brooks Clothing of California, Ltd. v. Flynn
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided May 13, 1931PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtVan Kirk, P. J.
This matter was presented to the Special Term and decided solely on the ground of similitude of corporate names under the General Corporation Law. In such case a peremptory mandamus order was not the proper remedy. Section 9 provides: “No certificate of incorporation of a proposed domestic corporation, and no statement and designation of a foreign corporation, having the same name as a corporation authorized to do business under the laws of this State or a name so nearly resembling it as to be calculated to deceive, shall be filed or recorded in any office for the purpose of effecting its…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Harris v. Commissioners of the Land OfficeNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- N.Y. Cable Co. v. . Mayor, Etc., of N.Y.New York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Von Lengerke v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1912
- Von Lengerke v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1914
3Cited by5 opinions
- Kiamesha Development Corp. v. Guild Properties, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1958
- Horowitz v. BeamishSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Horowitz v. Beamish, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Dauphin County1935
- Jervis Corp. v. Secretary of StateNew York Supreme Court · 1964
- Kiamesha Development Corp. v. Guild Properties, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1958