Daro Industries, Inc. v. RAS Enterprises, Inc.

New York Court of Appeals

Daro Industries, Inc. v. RAS Enterprises, Inc.

380 N.E.2d 160, 44 N.Y.2d 969, 44 N.Y. 969, 408 N.Y.S.2d 329, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2157

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 6, 1978

StatusPublished

Cited by13 cases

This text of 380 N.E.2d 160 (Daro Industries, Inc. v. RAS Enterprises, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Daro Industries, Inc. v. RAS Enterprises, Inc., 380 N.E.2d 160, 44 N.Y.2d 969, 44 N.Y. 969, 408 N.Y.S.2d 329, 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2157 (N.Y. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division. We would only add that the powers of a temporary receiver are limited to those enumerated in the appointing order. (CPLR 6401, subd [b].) Since the temporary receiver in this case was not expressly granted the power to *971 sue for claims of the corporation arising before his appointment, that power is retained by the corporation.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum. Question certified answered in the affirmative.

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