James J. Donovan, Suing on Behalf of Himself and All Other Stockholders of Securities-Allied Corporation and on Behalf of Securities-Allied Corporation, Appellant, v. Atlas Corporation and Others, Respondents, Impleaded with Edward K. Hall, Defendant. Francis M. Crawley, Petitioner, Respondent; In the Matter of the Application of Francis M. Crawley, Appellant, for Leave to Intervene in and to Become a Party Plaintiff in the Action of James J. Donovan, Suing on Behalf of Himself and All Other Stockholders of Securities-Allied Corporation, and on Behalf of Securities-Allied Corporation, Respondent, v. Atlas Corporation and Others, Respondents, Impleaded with Edward K. Hall, Defendant

James J. Donovan, Suing on Behalf of Himself and All Other Stockholders of Securities-Allied Corporation and on Behalf of Securities-Allied Corporation, Appellant, v. Atlas Corporation and Others, Respondents, Impleaded with Edward K. Hall, Defendant. Francis M. Crawley, Petitioner, Respondent. In the Matter of the Application of Francis M. Crawley, Appellant, for Leave to Intervene in and to Become a Party Plaintiff in the Action of James J. Donovan, Suing on Behalf of Himself and All Other Stockholders of Securities-Allied Corporation, and on Behalf of Securities-Allied Corporation, Respondent, v. Atlas Corporation and Others, Respondents, Impleaded with Edward K. Hall, Defendant. First Department, November 27, 1936. Alfred J. Talley of counsel [James A. McKaigney, George D. Hornstein and Abraham Hornstein with him on the brief; Talley & Lamb, attorneys], for the plaintiff-appellant and petitioner-appellant. Leonard P. Moore, Whitney North Seymour, Abraham Shamos and Thomas F. Daly of counsel [David S. Hecht and John T. Lorch with them on the brief; Chadbourne, Stanchfield & Levy, attorneys; Frederick B. Lee with them on the brief ; Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett, attorneys; Guggenheimer & Untermyer, attorneys, and Lord, Day & Lord, attorneys], for the defendants-respondents. [MAJORITY — Per Curiam.] Per Curiam. We are of opinion that under all the facts and circumstances disclosed the trial court should have granted the motion for leave to intervene. Thus the entire ownership and interest in the shares would be before the court and a determination of the issues on the merits could be had, thereby avoiding further delay and a multiplicity of suits. Accordingly the judgment and the order should be reversed, with costs to the appellants, the motion for leave to intervene granted, and the pleadings amended accordingly. Present—Martin, P. J., McAvoy, O’Malley, Townley and Dore, JJ. Judgment and order unanimously reversed, with costs to the appellants, the motion for leave to intervene granted, and the pleadings amended accordingly.