Legal Opinion
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,845 Martin Fox v. Reich & Tang, Inc. And Daily Income Fund, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided October 26, 1982No. 74, Docket 82-7296PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
IRVING R. KAUFMAN, Circuit Judge:
This case presents an issue of first impression in this Circuit. The question before us is whether, in a shareholder action brought pursuant to § 36(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 to recover allegedly excessive fees paid by an investment company to its adviser, 1 the shareholder plaintiff is required to plead that a “demand” was made on the company’s board of directors prior to filing of the complaint. 2 At first blush, resolution of this question would seem to require merely clarification of a technical pleading rule. As our discussion makes clear,…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Middlesex County Sewerage Authority v. National Sea Clammers Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Ross v. BernhardSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Daily Income Fund, Inc. v. FoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Operating Local 649 Annuity Trust Fund v. Smith Barney Fund Management LLCCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2010
- Northstar Financial Advisors Inc. v. Schwab InvestmentsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- United States v. EvansCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1988
- Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.