Large v. Consolidated Nat. Bank
This text of 137 F. 168 (Large v. Consolidated Nat. Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This is an application for a mandamus to compel the defendant to permit the plaintiff to have an inspection of its list of shareholders, granted upon section 5210 of the Revised Statutes of the United States [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3498]. It must be denied for two reasons:
First. It does not appear by the petition that the matter in dispute exceeds the value of $2,000. The only averment from which the amount in controversy can be ascertained is that the plaintiff is the registered owner of 10 shares of the capital stock of the defendant. The controversy' is, therefore, not one of which this court has jurisdiction.
Second. This court has power to issue a mandamus only in the exercise of a jurisdiction to which it is an ancillary proceeding. Notwithstanding the very cogent reasons given in the dissenting opinion in Rosenbaum v. Bauer, 120 U. S. 450, 7 Sup. Ct. 633, 30 L. Ed. 743, to the contrary, the judgment in that case must be accepted as controlling upon this court.
The petition is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
137 F. 168, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 5213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/large-v-consolidated-nat-bank-circtsdny-1905.