Russian Reinsurance Company v. Stoddard

148 N.E. 757, 240 N.Y. 682, 1925 N.Y. LEXIS 926
New York Court of Appeals·Decided June 12, 1925·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We have decided that considerations of justice and fairness to the defendant should lead „ the courts of this State to refuse jurisdiction of the present action to compel the defendant trust company to deliver securities and property to the plaintiff. We have not decided that equitable considerations ought not to lead the courts to take jurisdiction of some other action in which a measure of relief might be granted which would be fair to the plaintiff or its stockholders and yet afford adequate protection to the defendant.

The motion for a re-argument should be denied, without costs and without prejudice to the commencement of a new action for such, relief.

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

Russian Reinsurance Company v. Stoddard, 148 N.E. 757, 240 N.Y. 682, 1925 N.Y. LEXIS 926 (N.Y. 1925).

148 N.E. 757 (Russian Reinsurance Company v. Stoddard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related