Sigfeld Realty v. Landsman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sigfeld Realty v. Landsman

234 A.D.2d 148, 651 N.Y.S.2d 35, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12539

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

DecidedDecember 17, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 234 A.D.2d 148 (Sigfeld Realty v. Landsman) 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

Sigfeld Realty v. Landsman, 234 A.D.2d 148, 651 N.Y.S.2d 35, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12539 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.), entered May 5,1995, which dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without prejudice to any application which plaintiff may be advised to make to the IAS Court for leave to replead, without costs.

The IAS Court properly found that, due to a conflict of interest, plaintiff sponsor, owner of 78% of the shares in the cooperative corporation and the holder of the wraparound mortgage, was an improper party to commence a shareholder’s derivative action (see, Steinberg v Steinberg, 106 Misc 2d 720, 721). However, plaintiff should be accorded the right to seek leave to replead. We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments [149]*149and find them to be without merit. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.), entered May 5,1995, which dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without prejudice to any application which plaintiff may be advised to make to the IAS Court for leave to replead, without costs.

The IAS Court properly found that, due to a conflict of interest, plaintiff sponsor, owner of 78% of the shares in the cooperative corporation and the holder of the wraparound mortgage, was an improper party to commence a shareholder’s derivative action (see, Steinberg v Steinberg, 106 Misc 2d 720, 721). However, plaintiff should be accorded the right to seek leave to replead. We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments [149]*149and find them to be without merit. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

234 A.D.2d 148, 651 N.Y.S.2d 35, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12539, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sigfeld-realty-v-landsman-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack