Eisenberg v. Central Zone Property Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Eisenberg v. Central Zone Property Corp.

281 A.D. 817, 118 N.Y.S.2d 919, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3413

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

DecidedFebruary 17, 1953

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 281 A.D. 817 (Eisenberg v. Central Zone Property Corp.) 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

Eisenberg v. Central Zone Property Corp., 281 A.D. 817, 118 N.Y.S.2d 919, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3413 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings denied and defendant’s cross motion granted. The complaint as amplified by the incorporated exhibits does not charge the proposal of an illegal plan. Bach of the major phases of the plan was authorized by statute. The transfer to the Delaware corporation was authorized by section 20 of the Stock Corporation Law, subject of course to the right of appraisal in dissenting stockholders. The prospective dissolution of the New York corporation involving a distribution of securities was authorized by section 105 of the Stock Corporation Law subject, once again, to the right of appraisal of dissenting stockholders. Settle order on notice. Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Breitel, JJ. [203 Misc. 59.]

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

Order unanimously reversed, plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings denied and defendant’s cross motion granted. The complaint as amplified by the incorporated exhibits does not charge the proposal of an illegal plan. Bach of the major phases of the plan was authorized by statute. The transfer to the Delaware corporation was authorized by section 20 of the Stock Corporation Law, subject of course to the right of appraisal in dissenting stockholders. The prospective dissolution of the New York corporation involving a distribution of securities was authorized by section 105 of the Stock Corporation Law subject, once again, to the right of appraisal of dissenting stockholders. Settle order on notice. Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Breitel, JJ. [203 Misc. 59.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D. 817, 118 N.Y.S.2d 919, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eisenberg-v-central-zone-property-corp-nyappdiv-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack