1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 30 F.Supp.
  5. 30 F.Supp. 171 (1939)
 

PICCARD v. SPERRY CORPORATION

30 F.Supp. 171 (1939)

PICCARD v. SPERRY CORPORATION et al.

District Court, S. D. New York.

March 13, 1939.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

A. Joseph Geist, of New York City (George E. Netter, of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.

Stanchfield & Levy, of New York City (George Z. Medalie, David S. Hecht, and William W. Golub, all of New York City, of counsel), for defendants Sanderson, Morgan and Doe.

Chadbourne, Hunt, Jaeckel & Brown, of New York City (Humes, Buck, Smith & Stowell and William H. Hall, all of New York City, of counsel), for Standard Capital Co.

Sullivan & Cromwell, of New York City, for defendant Wright Duryea.

COXE, District Judge.

These are motions (1) by the defendants Sanderson, Doe, Morgan, Duryea, and Standard Capital Company for summary judgment under Rule 56, Rules of Civil Procedure for District Courts, 28 U.S. C.A. following section 723c, and (2) by the defendants Sanderson, Doe and Morgan for a protective order under Rule 30(b) with respect to a proposed examination of the defendant Morgan under Rule 26.

The suit is a derivative one by a holder of voting...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases