Opinion · Nylaw New York

LOYDAHL v. HAGLUND, 260 App. Div. 900 (1940)

260 App. Div. 900

Type: Opinion
Court: Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction: Nylaw
Date: 1940-10-02
Topic: general

LOYDAHL v. HAGLUND, 260 App. Div. 900 (1940) HELMFRID LOYDAHL, Suing on Behalf of Himself and of Other Stockholders ofLUNDELL-ECKBERG MANUFACTURING CO., INC., Similarly Situated and on Behalf ofthe Corporation, Respondent, v. ELMER HAGLUND, Appellant, D. LAWRENCECARLSON, Defendant, and VICTOR LUNDELL, Appellant, Constituting the Board ofDirectors and Sole Officers of the LUNDELL-ECKBERG MANUFACTURING CO., INC.,and LUNDELL-ECKBERG MANUFACTURING CO., INC., Defendant.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed LOYDAHL v. HAGLUND, 260 App. Div. 900 (1940). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

LOYDAHL v. HAGLUND,260 App. Div. 900(1940)

HELMFRID LOYDAHL, Suing on Behalf of Himself and of Other Stockholders of

LUNDELL-ECKBERG MANUFACTURING CO., INC., Similarly Situated and on Behalf of

the Corporation, Respondent, v. ELMER HAGLUND, Appellant, D. LAWRENCE

CARLSON, Defendant, and VICTOR LUNDELL, Appellant, Constituting the Board of

Directors and Sole Officers of the LUNDELL-ECKBERG MANUFACTURING CO., INC.,

and LUNDELL-ECKBERG MANUFACTURING CO., INC., Defendant.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department.

October 2, 1940.

Order so far as appealed from affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. All concur. (The portion of the order appealed from denies a motion of defendants Lundell and Haglund to vacate a notice and subpoenaduces tecumfor their examination before trial in a stockholder's action.)

Present — Crosby, P.J., Cunningham Dowling, Harris and McCurn, JJ.Page 901