George A. Landell, of E. A. Landell, Deceased, Etc. v. Northern Pacific Railway Company

D.C. Circuit

George A. Landell, of E. A. Landell, Deceased, Etc. v. Northern Pacific Railway Company

223 F.2d 316, 253 F.2d 316, 96 U.S. App. D.C. 24, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 3958

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedApril 14, 1955

Docket12428_1

StatusPublished

Cited by16 cases

This text of 223 F.2d 316 (George A. Landell, of E. A. Landell, Deceased, Etc. v. Northern Pacific Railway Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

George A. Landell, of E. A. Landell, Deceased, Etc. v. Northern Pacific Railway Company, 223 F.2d 316, 253 F.2d 316, 96 U.S. App. D.C. 24, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 3958 (D.C. Cir. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellants, acting as a committee of minority stockholders of the Northern Pacific Railroad Company, a federal corporation organized and existing under an act of Congress of July 2, 1864, 1 brought this civil action. The gravamen of the complaint was that a reorganization of the railroad in 1896 was illegal. Appellants said they had protested the reorganization continuously since that date. However that may be, they did not seek judicial remedy until they brought the present action in 1950. 2 In the District Court Judge Tamm, with a careful and exhaustive opinion, 3 concluded that the action was barred by laches. We agree and have nothing to add to his discussion of the matter.

Affirmed.

1

. 13 Stat. 365.

2

. A suit was brought in the Southern District of New York in 1900 by one Hoover, not of appellants’ committee. It was allowed to die for want of prosecution in 1939, and a motion to reinstate it was denied for inexcusable laches.

3

. Landell v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co., 122 F.Supp. 253 (D.C.D.C.1954).

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellants, acting as a committee of minority stockholders of the Northern Pacific Railroad Company, a federal corporation organized and existing under an act of Congress of July 2, 1864, 1 brought this civil action. The gravamen of the complaint was that a reorganization of the railroad in 1896 was illegal. Appellants said they had protested the reorganization continuously since that date. However that may be, they did not seek judicial remedy until they brought the present action in 1950. 2 In the District Court Judge Tamm, with a careful and exhaustive opinion, 3 concluded that the action was barred by laches. We agree and have nothing to add to his discussion of the matter.

Affirmed.

1

. 13 Stat. 365.

2

. A suit was brought in the Southern District of New York in 1900 by one Hoover, not of appellants’ committee. It was allowed to die for want of prosecution in 1939, and a motion to reinstate it was denied for inexcusable laches.

3

. Landell v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co., 122 F.Supp. 253 (D.C.D.C.1954).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

223 F.2d 316, 253 F.2d 316, 96 U.S. App. D.C. 24, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 3958, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-a-landell-of-e-a-landell-deceased-etc-v-northern-pacific-cadc-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack