New York Court of Appeals, 1983

Rubinstein v. Catacosinos

New York Court of Appeals · Decided November 23, 1983

60 N.Y.2d 890; 458 N.E.2d 1247; 470 N.Y.S.2d 570; 1983 N.Y. LEXIS 3547

Cases that cite this one

13 later published cases cite this decision.

People v. Grasso (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
Dooner v. Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 2001)
Lichtenberg v. Besicorp Group Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 1999)
Friedman v. Mohasco Corporation (2d Cir. 1991)
Friedman v. Mohasco Corp. (2d Cir. 1991)
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Griffin (Ind. Ct. App. 1989)
Hong Qin Jiang v. Li Wan Wu (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
New York State Workers' Compensation Bd. v. Compensation Risk Mgrs., LLC (New York Supreme Court 2017)
Maldonado v. DiBre (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
Ciullo v. Orange & Rockland Utilities, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2000)
Silverman v. Schwartz (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1998)
Bronzaft v. Caporali (New York Supreme Court 1994)
Center v. Hampton Affiliates, Inc. (N.Y. 1985)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the opinion by Justice Samuel J. Silverman at the Appellate Division (91 AD2d 445).

In so ruling, we deem it necessary to add the following comments. First, section 906 of the Business Corporation Law is not one of the enumerated laws specifically applicable to foreign corporations doing business in New York (Business Corporation Law, § 1319, subd [a]). Second, inasmuch as it is concluded that plaintiff had no standing to continue this shareholder’s derivative action, there is no occasion to decide whether liability for insider trading may be imposed against nonparticipating but acquiescing directors (cf. Diamond v Oreamuno, 24 NY2d 494, affg 29 AD2d 285). Last, it is noted that plaintiff did not seek to protect her rights by raising the claim she now makes through an appraisal proceeding.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.