Willcox v. Stern

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Willcox v. Stern

24 A.D.2d 845, 263 N.Y.S.2d 1005, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3073

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

DecidedNovember 4, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 24 A.D.2d 845 (Willcox v. Stern) 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

Willcox v. Stern, 24 A.D.2d 845, 263 N.Y.S.2d 1005, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3073 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously modified, on the law, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs or disbursements, to strike the leave granted to petitioner to serve an amended petition and in lieu thereof to provide that within 20 days after service of a copy of the order hereon with notice of entry, the petitioner may apply to Special Term for leave to replead; and order otherwise affirmed, without costs and disbursements. There is no showing that the petitioner “ has good ground to support ” an article 78 proceeding on theory of a failure and refusal of the respondent Superintendent of Insurance to evaluate the merger plan in the light of alleged fraud and breach of trust on the part of respondent Transamerica Insurance Company; and, consequently, leave to replead should not have been granted. (See CPLR 3211, subd. [e].) It does not satisfactorily appear that there is factual support for petitioner’s claims of fraud and breach of trust or that the same will furnish a basis for an attack upon the action of the Superintendent as unlawful, arbitrary or unreasonable. Furthermore, for all that appears, the petitioner may have an adequate remedy in the recovery of the value of his stock in the appraisal proceeding or the recovery of damages in a proper action. Concur— Botein, P. J., Breitel, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ. [44 Misc 2d 827.]

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

Judgment unanimously modified, on the law, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs or disbursements, to strike the leave granted to petitioner to serve an amended petition and in lieu thereof to provide that within 20 days after service of a copy of the order hereon with notice of entry, the petitioner may apply to Special Term for leave to replead; and order otherwise affirmed, without costs and disbursements. There is no showing that the petitioner “ has good ground to support ” an article 78 proceeding on theory of a failure and refusal of the respondent Superintendent of Insurance to evaluate the merger plan in the light of alleged fraud and breach of trust on the part of respondent Transamerica Insurance Company; and, consequently, leave to replead should not have been granted. (See CPLR 3211, subd. [e].) It does not satisfactorily appear that there is factual support for petitioner’s claims of fraud and breach of trust or that the same will furnish a basis for an attack upon the action of the Superintendent as unlawful, arbitrary or unreasonable. Furthermore, for all that appears, the petitioner may have an adequate remedy in the recovery of the value of his stock in the appraisal proceeding or the recovery of damages in a proper action. Concur— Botein, P. J., Breitel, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ. [44 Misc 2d 827.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 845, 263 N.Y.S.2d 1005, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3073, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willcox-v-stern-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack