Sperling

Smith v. Sperling

Caution
237 F.2d 317
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 21, 1956No. 14334California1,960 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fee, J.

This is a stockholders’ derivative suit, which was brought ostensibly for the benefit of Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc., a Delaware corporation, by plaintiff Smith, as Special Administrator of the Estate of Edward S. Birn, deceased, owner of 400 shares of stock therein. Yhe corporation was joined as a defendant with two of its directors and another Delaware corporation, United States Pictures, Inc., along with one Sperling, a director of the latter. The trial court directed that the questions relating to jurisdiction and limitations should be determined before trial on the merits.

Upon such a preliminary hearing, judgment of dismissal of the first cause of action was granted because, when the court realigned. Warner Bros., as plaintiff, diversity of citizenship no longer existed, since Delaware corporations were, respectively, among the plaintiffs and among the defendants.

The second cause of action was dismissed for lack of equity. This cause was asserted against defendants Harry M. Warner and Jack L. Warner alone, and is based upon alleged violations of their duties in a fiduciary capacity as directors of Warner Bros. A third cause of suit was dismissed upon stipulation by the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.