Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Corporations - Liquidation Upon Deadlock In Closely-Held Corporation - Interpretion Of Wisconsin Statute, Strong V. Fromm Laboratories,, Paul Komives
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff, as trustee of an estate, held fifty percent of the shares of a going corporation. An election to fill all four positions on the corporation's board of directors was held. Since a by-law required that directors be shareholders, plaintiff was the only member of his own faction for whom he could vote. The opposing faction, holding the remaining fifty percent of the shares, had four eligible candidates. Votes for each of the four were cast, with one receiving one vote less than the other three. Plaintiff voted all of his shares for himself and also cast a vote of …
Corporations - Stockholders - Availability Of Federal Remedy As Basis For Denial Of Attorney Fees In Derivative Action, Jerome Prewoznik
Corporations - Stockholders - Availability Of Federal Remedy As Basis For Denial Of Attorney Fees In Derivative Action, Jerome Prewoznik
Michigan Law Review
Defendants were directors of Merritt, Chapman and Scott Corporation and of Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc. simultaneously. Plaintiff, a stockholder in Merritt, instituted a derivative suit to compel the resignation of defendants from their positions with Ward on the ground that an interlocking directorate existed making Merritt subject to criminal and civil prosecution under federal law. Defendants resigned before judgment. Plaintiff, arguing that its suit was the cause of the resignations and that Merritt was thereby benefited, moved for an award of counsel fees to be assessed against Merritt. Held, application for counsel fee denied. Plaintiff could have achieved …
Corporations - Stockholder's Suit - Necessity Of Demand On Other Stockholders In Derivative Action, John C. Dowd
Corporations - Stockholder's Suit - Necessity Of Demand On Other Stockholders In Derivative Action, John C. Dowd
Michigan Law Review
In two related cases, a holder of common stock brought a derivative suit against the directors of his corporation claiming their illegal acts had deprived the corporation of assets. On defendants' motion to dismiss and for summary" judgment, held, judgment for the defendants. Plaintiff's failure to allege either that he had presented his claim to the stockholders at a stockholders' meeting or that a majority of the stockholders' votes were under the control of the directors defeated his action. Carroll v. New York, New Haven & Hartford R.; Glenmore v. Alpert, (D.C. Mass. 1956) 141 F. Supp. 456.