Zimmermann v. Jewett

19 Abb. N. Cas. 459
The Superior Court of New York City·Decided May 15, 1886·Published

Opinion

The court held that the attempted irrevocable character of the arrangementbeing separable, the arrangement was legal as assenting stockholders did not object : and the power to revoke could only be exercised by those who had assented. The court distinguished Hafer v. N. Y., Lake Erie & Western R. R. Co., above cited [p. 454], as a case where the right “ was conferred on a party not otherwise interested in the road,” and the principal object of the contract was illegal, and one not a party to it was entitled to an injunction because its effect was to remove the control of the company entirely away from the stockholders.

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

Zimmermann v. Jewett, 19 Abb. N. Cas. 459 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1886).

19 Abb. N. Cas. 459 (Zimmermann v. Jewett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.