Cashman v. Petrie

19 A.D.2d 520, 240 N.Y.S.2d 46, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3771

Opinion

Order entered on October 26, 1962 denying defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint for insufficiency, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellants, the motion granted, with $10 costs and the complaint dismissed, with costs. It is apparent from the complaint — and the respondent in effect so concedes — that this is an action seeking relief by reason of conduct of trustee corporate directors alleged to be violative of the provisions of a testamentary trust. This conduct involves the refusal to declare dividends which would enure to the income beneficiaries of the trust. In the circumstances alleged these trustee directors may not be circumscribed by the provisions of the trust in their exercise of discretion and judgment qua directors in the area of dividend declaration. (See Matter of Shupach, 1 N Y 2d 482; Matter of Doelger, 254 App. Div. 178, affd. 279 N. Y. 646; Boyle v. Boyle é Go., 136 App. Div. 367, affd. 200 N. Y. 597.) Accordingly the complaint must be dismissed. Such dismissal, however, is without prejudice to any appropriate [521]*521stockholder’s derivative action the plaintiff may be advised to bring. (See Gordon v. Elliman, 306 N. Y. 456.) Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Eager and Steuer, JJ.

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

Cashman v. Petrie, 19 A.D.2d 520, 240 N.Y.S.2d 46, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3771 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

19 A.D.2d 520 (Cashman v. Petrie) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Boyle v. . John Boye Company, Incorporated
94 N.E. 1092 (New York Court of Appeals, 1911)
In Re the Accounting of Doelger
18 N.E.2d 42 (New York Court of Appeals, 1938)
Boyle v. John Boyle & Co.
136 A.D. 367 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1910)
In re Doelger
254 A.D. 178 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1938)
Gordon v. Elliman
119 N.E.2d 331 (New York Court of Appeals, 1954)