Twelve Lions Renaissance Corp. v. 684 Owners Corp.

157 A.D.2d 577, 551 N.Y.S.2d 775, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 562
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 25, 1990·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (David Saxe, J.), entered October 6, 1988, which, inter alia, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

In the first and second causes of action of this derivative suit, the only claims briefed by plaintiff-appellant, the former sponsor of the 1979 cooperative conversion of these premises and a shareholder of the cooperative corporation, seek to require the cooperative corporation officers and directors to reimburse the co-op for legal fees and expenses incurred in certain prior litigation between plaintiff or an entity controlled by the same principal and the co-op. Such litigation is but a part of a seemingly endless battle between the parties. We agree with Supreme Court that there were no genuine material issues of facts as to the cooperative officers’ and [578]*578directors’ good faith and exercise of honest business judgment in their conduct in connection with the underlying litigation. (Auerbach v Bennett, 47 NY2d 619, 629.) Concur—Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Sullivan, Carro and Rosenberger, JJ.

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

Twelve Lions Renaissance Corp. v. 684 Owners Corp., 157 A.D.2d 577, 551 N.Y.S.2d 775, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 562 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

157 A.D.2d 577 (Twelve Lions Renaissance Corp. v. 684 Owners Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Too Pyo Hong v. Byung Wha Yoo
231 A.D.2d 657 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Vasinkevich v. Elm Drugs
208 A.D.2d 522 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)