Goldsamt v. Georgia-Pacific Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Goldsamt v. Georgia-Pacific Corp.

29 A.D.2d 933, 289 N.Y.S.2d 27, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4187

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

DecidedApril 23, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 29 A.D.2d 933 (Goldsamt v. Georgia-Pacific 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

Goldsamt v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., 29 A.D.2d 933, 289 N.Y.S.2d 27, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4187 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment entered January 5, 1968, in each appeal, insofar as the same grants plaintiff’s cross motion for orders appointing a Special Referee to hear and determine whether plaintiff’s attorneys were entitled to fees, unanimously reversed, on the facts and the law, with $30 costs and disbursements to appellant and cross motions denied. The actions are two of four stockholders’ derivative actions, the other two being in the Federal courts. One of the actions was tried in the United States District Court and resulted in a judgment for defendants. The other three, including the two instant actions, were dismissed for lack of prosecution. No applications were made for fees in the other actions. The latter Federal court action was dismissed over four years ago. If any fees were allowable, they could and should have been applied for in that court (Montra Corp. v. Bishop, 6 A D 2d 787). Moreover, no beneficial result to the corporation from the bringing of the action was shown. Concur— Botein, P. J., Stevens, Steuer, Tilzer and McNally, JJ.

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

Order and judgment entered January 5, 1968, in each appeal, insofar as the same grants plaintiff’s cross motion for orders appointing a Special Referee to hear and determine whether plaintiff’s attorneys were entitled to fees, unanimously reversed, on the facts and the law, with $30 costs and disbursements to appellant and cross motions denied. The actions are two of four stockholders’ derivative actions, the other two being in the Federal courts. One of the actions was tried in the United States District Court and resulted in a judgment for defendants. The other three, including the two instant actions, were dismissed for lack of prosecution. No applications were made for fees in the other actions. The latter Federal court action was dismissed over four years ago. If any fees were allowable, they could and should have been applied for in that court (Montra Corp. v. Bishop, 6 A D 2d 787). Moreover, no beneficial result to the corporation from the bringing of the action was shown. Concur— Botein, P. J., Stevens, Steuer, Tilzer and McNally, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.2d 933, 289 N.Y.S.2d 27, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldsamt-v-georgia-pacific-corp-nyappdiv-1968.