Brewster v. F. G. Brewster Co.

127 A.D. 729, 111 N.Y.S. 1026, 1908 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4087
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 8, 1908
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 127 A.D. 729 (Brewster v. F. G. Brewster Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brewster v. F. G. Brewster Co., 127 A.D. 729, 111 N.Y.S. 1026, 1908 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4087 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Opinion

Per Curiam :

It cannot be necessary for the plaintiffs to inspect all of the general business books of the defendant corporation for the purpose of ascertaining whether there was any agreement between plaintiffs’ intestate, Frederick G. Brewster, and the defendant Hartog as to equal control of the corporation,.or as to whether the issue of stock putting control of the corporation in defendants was authorized ■ or not.

The order is very sweeping in its terms and we think was unauthorized. It would be much better practice for the plaintiffs to examine the officers of the corporation and thus ascertain what [730]*730books or accounts were kept which might tend to prove an agreement of equal control or a course of dealing tending to show that such an agreement existed, and what books or accounts throw light' upon' the alleged unauthorized issue of stock, and then obtain an order for the inspection of such books as are shown to be material.

It would appear that the defendants had offered inspection of books of this character prior to the obtaining of the present order.

The order appealed from should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs, without prejudice, however, to renewal as to specific books and accounts shown, to be material.

Present—Ingeaham, McLaughlin, Laughlin, Houghton and Scott,-JJ.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Funger v. Brooklyn Bottle Stopper Co.
132 A.D. 837 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1909)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
127 A.D. 729, 111 N.Y.S. 1026, 1908 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4087, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brewster-v-f-g-brewster-co-nyappdiv-1908.