General

Andrew Weinstock, Appellant, v. John L. Goldwater et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants

88 A.D.2d 911·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1982·NY

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

Andrew Weinstock, Appellant, v John L. Goldwater et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. [MAJORITY] — In a shareholder’s derivative action seeking, inter alia, a declaration that a corporate policy of defendant Archie Enterprises, Inc., is “null and void”, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Velsor, J.), dated May 8, 1981, which denied his motion for summary judgment and granted defendants-respondents’ cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the basis of prematurity. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. We find under the circumstances of this case that Special Term did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint as being premature. Damiani, J. P., Mangano, Gulotta and Niehoff, JJ., concur.