WITTNEBEL v. LOUGHMAN


9 F.Supp. 465 (1935)

WITTNEBEL v. LOUGHMAN.

District Court, S. D. New York.

January 4, 1935.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Breed, Abbott & Morgan, of New York City (Charles H. Tuttle, of New York City, and Thomas E. Kerwin, of New Rochelle, N. Y., of counsel), for plaintiff.

Dunlap, Otto & McGovern, of New Rochelle, N. Y. (Charles Wainwright, of Washington, D. C., of counsel), for defendant.


PATTERSON, District Judge.

The plaintiff, a stockholder in a failed national bank, has brought suit to restrain the receiver of the bank from impeding the plaintiff's examination of the books and records of the bank. The present motion is by the defendant to dismiss the amended bill as insufficient on its face.

The amended bill is long and discursive. In substance it avers that the plaintiff is and for years has been a large stockholder of the National City...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases