From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Edelman v. Frindel

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Dec 28, 1955
132 N.E.2d 311 (N.Y. 1955)

Opinion

Argued October 5, 1955

Decided December 28, 1955

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, WALTER, J.

Jay Leo Rothschild for appellant.

Samuel Gottlieb, Alvin T. Sapinsley, respondent in person, and Harry Giesow for Sam Frindel, Jr., and others, respondents.


Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: CONWAY, Ch. J., DESMOND, FULD and FROESSEL, JJ. VAN VOORHIS and BURKE, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse upon the ground that the personal representatives of Elias A. Cohen were under a fiduciary obligation to come forward with an explanation of the purpose to which these funds of 123 Cedar Street Corporation were applied, and that under the evidence in this record these funds must be held to have been expended for the purchase of an equity interest as contended by plaintiff. Taking no part: DYE, J.


Summaries of

Edelman v. Frindel

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Dec 28, 1955
132 N.E.2d 311 (N.Y. 1955)
Case details for

Edelman v. Frindel

Case Details

Full title:SAMUEL EDELMAN, on Behalf of Himself and All Other Stockholders of 123…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Dec 28, 1955

Citations

132 N.E.2d 311 (N.Y. 1955)
132 N.E.2d 311

Citing Cases

Tepper v. Tannenbaum

Despite the court's doubts as to admissibility, the bulk of plaintiff's evidence was received over the CPLR…

Matter of Fello

A successor fiduciary is one who derives his title and interest from his predecessor (Blumenthal v Kelsey, 95…