Haselnuss v. Carnesecchi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Haselnuss v. Carnesecchi

236 A.D.2d 325, 654 N.Y.S.2d 308, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1596

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

DecidedFebruary 25, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 236 A.D.2d 325 (Haselnuss v. Carnesecchi) 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

Haselnuss v. Carnesecchi, 236 A.D.2d 325, 654 N.Y.S.2d 308, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1596 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anne Targum, J.), entered December 5, 1995, which, inter alia, granted petitioners’ application to vacate an election of the subject corporation’s directors and officers held on April 29, 1995, and directed that a new election be held on March 5, 1996, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We agree with the motion court that the results of the purported election conducted at a general shareholders’ meeting held on April 29, 1995 should be vacated, there being no merit to appellant’s claim that the notice circulated by petitioners rescheduling that meeting was invalid. While the leaseback agreement may be violative of Business Corporation Law § 609 (e), inasmuch as appellant presented no evidence that the alleged illegal proxies obtained as a result of the leaseback were used in subsequent elections, we decline to invalidate any election on that basis. We have considered appellant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anne Targum, J.), entered December 5, 1995, which, inter alia, granted petitioners’ application to vacate an election of the subject corporation’s directors and officers held on April 29, 1995, and directed that a new election be held on March 5, 1996, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We agree with the motion court that the results of the purported election conducted at a general shareholders’ meeting held on April 29, 1995 should be vacated, there being no merit to appellant’s claim that the notice circulated by petitioners rescheduling that meeting was invalid. While the leaseback agreement may be violative of Business Corporation Law § 609 (e), inasmuch as appellant presented no evidence that the alleged illegal proxies obtained as a result of the leaseback were used in subsequent elections, we decline to invalidate any election on that basis. We have considered appellant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 A.D.2d 325, 654 N.Y.S.2d 308, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1596, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haselnuss-v-carnesecchi-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack