Burg v. Eve Joy Knitting Mills, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Burg v. Eve Joy Knitting Mills, Inc.

92 A.D.2d 604, 459 N.Y.S.2d 796, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16862

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 28, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 92 A.D.2d 604 (Burg v. Eve Joy Knitting Mills, Inc.) 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

Burg v. Eve Joy Knitting Mills, Inc., 92 A.D.2d 604, 459 N.Y.S.2d 796, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16862 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding in which petitioner seeks leave to inspect the corporate books and records of respondent, petitioner appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Underwood, J.), dated January 27,1982, which denied his application and (2) an order of the same court, dated October 15, 1982, which denied petitioner’s motion, inter alla, for renewal. Order dated January 27,1982, reversed and matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings consistent herewith. Appeal from the order dated October 15, 1982, dismissed as academic in light of our determination of the appeal from the order dated January 27,1982. Petitioner is awarded one bill of $50 costs and disbursements. Petitioner’s right to inspect respondent’s books and records depends upon the good-faith basis for his request. This in turn depends upon whether petitioner’s relationship with his fellow shareholders is governed by a 1976 shareholders’ agreement or a 1981 shareholders’ agreement. In light of the conflicting allegations contained in the opposing affidavits submitted, it was error to resolve the conflict as to which agreement governed the relationship of the shareholders without first conducting a hearing. Damiani, J. P., Mangano, Thompson and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding in which petitioner seeks leave to inspect the corporate books and records of respondent, petitioner appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Underwood, J.), dated January 27,1982, which denied his application and (2) an order of the same court, dated October 15, 1982, which denied petitioner’s motion, inter alla, for renewal. Order dated January 27,1982, reversed and matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings consistent herewith. Appeal from the order dated October 15, 1982, dismissed as academic in light of our determination of the appeal from the order dated January 27,1982. Petitioner is awarded one bill of $50 costs and disbursements. Petitioner’s right to inspect respondent’s books and records depends upon the good-faith basis for his request. This in turn depends upon whether petitioner’s relationship with his fellow shareholders is governed by a 1976 shareholders’ agreement or a 1981 shareholders’ agreement. In light of the conflicting allegations contained in the opposing affidavits submitted, it was error to resolve the conflict as to which agreement governed the relationship of the shareholders without first conducting a hearing. Damiani, J. P., Mangano, Thompson and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 A.D.2d 604, 459 N.Y.S.2d 796, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16862, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burg-v-eve-joy-knitting-mills-inc-nyappdiv-1983.