Schwartz v. the Olympic, Inc.
This text of 74 F. Supp. 800 (Schwartz v. the Olympic, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
SCHWARTZ
v.
THE OLYMPIC, Inc., et al.
District Court, D. Delaware.
*801 Meyer Abrams, of Shulman, Shulman & Abrams, all of Chicago, Ill., and Harold B. Howard, of Wilmington, Del., for plaintiff.
Clair John Killoran and John Van Brunt, Jr., of Killoran & Van Brunt, all of Wilmington, Del., for defendants.
LEAHY, District Judge.
This is a diversity case where plaintiff seeks to set aside a merger of two Delaware companies. Delaware law controls. Plaintiff is the alleged owner of unregistered shares. Under Delaware law, an unregistered stockholder cannot attack a merger. Salt Dome Oil Corporation v. Schenck, Del., 41 A.2d 583, 158 A.L.R. 975; Application of General Realty & Utilities Corporation, Del.Ch., 42 A.2d 24.
Plaintiff also seeks to amend his complaint to bring in other parties plaintiff. If he cannot maintain his own complaint, he has no right to amend it. The complaint should be dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
74 F. Supp. 800, 1947 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1954, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schwartz-v-the-olympic-inc-ded-1947.