For Your Data Studebaker Corp. V. Gittlin Illustration Brief
March 03, 2016
Edit
Studebaker Corp. v. Gittlin illustration brief summary
360 F.2d 692 (1966)
CASE FACTS
Acting on his ain behalf in addition to on written authority of 42 other shareholders, respondent stockholder served papers on petitioner corporation to inspect petitioner's tape of shareholders. Petitioner claimed that respondent obtained the authorizations inwards violation of the proxy rules issued past times the Securities in addition to Exchange Commission (SEC) nether § 14a of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Act), inwards that respondent had made no filing of proxy cloth amongst the SEC prior to obtaining the authorizations. The lawsuit courtroom approximate enjoined the piece of occupation of the authorizations inwards the country courtroom proceeding.
DISCUSSION
The courtroom affirmed the gild enjoining the piece of occupation of stockholders' authorizations where proxy rules were violated, petitioner corporation had standing to enjoin violation of the proxy rules, in addition to the injunction did non violate the anti-injunction statute.
Recommended Supplements for Corporations in addition to Business Associations Law
360 F.2d 692 (1966)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Respondent stockholder contested an gild of the United States of America of America District Court for the Southern District of New York enjoining, equally violative of § 14a of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, piece of occupation of stockholders' authorizations inwards a New York country courtroom proceeding to obtain inspection of petitioner corporation's listing of shareholders.CASE FACTS
Acting on his ain behalf in addition to on written authority of 42 other shareholders, respondent stockholder served papers on petitioner corporation to inspect petitioner's tape of shareholders. Petitioner claimed that respondent obtained the authorizations inwards violation of the proxy rules issued past times the Securities in addition to Exchange Commission (SEC) nether § 14a of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Act), inwards that respondent had made no filing of proxy cloth amongst the SEC prior to obtaining the authorizations. The lawsuit courtroom approximate enjoined the piece of occupation of the authorizations inwards the country courtroom proceeding.
DISCUSSION
- The courtroom affirmed the gild in addition to held that corporations, also equally stockholders, had standing to enjoin violations of the proxy rules.
- Furthermore, the injunction did non violate the anti-injunction statute, 28 U.S.C.S. § 2283, because § 21e of the Act permitted a courtroom to enjoin actions that constituted violations of the Act's provisions.
The courtroom affirmed the gild enjoining the piece of occupation of stockholders' authorizations where proxy rules were violated, petitioner corporation had standing to enjoin violation of the proxy rules, in addition to the injunction did non violate the anti-injunction statute.
Recommended Supplements for Corporations in addition to Business Associations Law