Sweeney v. Moore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sweeney v. Moore

251 A.D. 743, 297 N.Y.S. 790, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7343

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 21, 1937·Published

Opinion

In a stockholders’ action charging that the appealing defendants, as directors, voted for and paid to themselves excessive and unreasonable salaries, and seeking to recover, for the benefit of the corporation, the excessive amounts so paid, judgment for plaintiff unanimously affirmed, [744]*744with costs. Conclusions of law numbered 1 and 3 in the defendants’ requests to find are struck out as inconsistent. The appealing defendants failed to establish alleged ratification by the plaintiff, with full knowledge of the facts and of her legal rights. (Adair v. Brimmer, 74 N. Y. 539, 554.) Present —■ Hagarty, Davis, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.

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

In a stockholders’ action charging that the appealing defendants, as directors, voted for and paid to themselves excessive and unreasonable salaries, and seeking to recover, for the benefit of the corporation, the excessive amounts so paid, judgment for plaintiff unanimously affirmed, [744]*744with costs. Conclusions of law numbered 1 and 3 in the defendants’ requests to find are struck out as inconsistent. The appealing defendants failed to establish alleged ratification by the plaintiff, with full knowledge of the facts and of her legal rights. (Adair v. Brimmer, 74 N. Y. 539, 554.) Present —■ Hagarty, Davis, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.

Sweeney v. Moore, 251 A.D. 743, 297 N.Y.S. 790, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7343 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

251 A.D. 743 (Sweeney v. Moore) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related