Munson Line v. Green, 84
| Decision Date | 05 January 1948 |
| Docket Number | No. 84,Docket 20759.,84 |
| Citation | 165 F.2d 321 |
| Parties | MUNSON LINE, Inc. v. GREEN et al. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Cahill, Gordon, Zachry & Reindel, of New York City (Paul Williams and Robert G. Zeller, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellant Munson Line, Inc.
Baker, Obermeier & Rosner, of New York City (Isidor J. Kresel and Oscar S. Rosner, both of New York City, of counsel; Jay Raymond Levinson and William Peyton Marin, both of New York City, on the brief), for appellees.
Before CHASE, CLARK and FRANK, Circuit Judges.
The jurisdiction based on diversity is clear but before the merits of this appeal may be considered it is necessary to decide whether the order is final and hence appealable within Section 128 of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C.A. § 225. The defendants moved before answer under Rule 12 (b) (6), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, to dismiss all of the three counts in the complaint on the ground that none of them stated a claim upon which relief could be granted. The order appealed from denied the motion as to the first count but granted it as to the two others.
In the first count it was alleged with considerable attention to detail that in substance the defendants, all security holders of the plaintiff, had, pursuant to a conspiracy, interfered maliciously and unlawfully with the plaintiff's business to the damage of its reputation and credit. The wrongful acts charged were the circulating of unfounded rumors disparaging the integrity and ability of its management; the bringing, or causing to be brought, against it of successive unjustified actions in which large damages and a receivership were sought upon many false and defamatory allegations of dishonesty and malfeasance on the part of its officers; and the attempting to persuade other stockholders to do likewise. The bringing of three suits and other instances of conduct in furtherance of the conspiracy were alleged and damages were sought for expenses in "defending and defeating" the lawsuits; for the time and effort of plaintiff's officers and directors diverted to that end "which would otherwise have been profitably devoted to the affairs of" the plaintiff; and for the general "damage to its business, credit and reputation."
The second count merely repeated by reference the allegations of the first with the addition that the defendants wilfully and wrongfully "conspired in New York falsely to institute and maintain actions and proceedings to injure" the plaintiff "all in violation of Section 580(3) of the New York Penal Law", Consol....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ring v. Spina
...dichotomy of "causes of action" between law and equity. Cf. Original Ballet Russe v. Ballet Theatre, 2 Cir., 133 F.2d 187; Munson Line v. Green, 2 Cir., 165 F.2d 321; Reeves v. Beardall, 316 U.S. 283, 285, 62 S.Ct. 1085, 86 L.Ed. 1478; Clark, Code Pleading, 2d Ed. 1947, 137, 146-148, 444, 4......
-
Weir v. Brune
...appealable judgment while the other counts remain pending because the counts are concerned with a single fact situation. Munson Line, Inc. v. Green, 2 Cir., 165 F.2d 321; Atwater v. North American Coal Corp., 2 Cir., 111 F.2d 125; Clark v. Taylor, 2 Cir., 163 F.2d 940, 942; Canister Co. v. ......
-
Atwood v. Kerlin
...to be brought where conspiracy is alleged. Luckett v. Cohen, supra; Munson Line v. Green, D.C., 6 F.R.D. 14, appeal dismissed 2 Cir., 165 F.2d 321; J. J. Theatres, Inc. v. V. R. O. K. Co., I might add that the deed of March 19, 1945, provides that there is to be no personal liability on the......
-
Lockwood v. Hercules Powder Co., 13800.
...Corporation, 2 Cir., 169 F.2d 254. See also Petrol Corporation v. Petroleum Heat & Power Co., Inc., 2 Cir., 162 F.2d 327; Munson Line v. Green, 2 Cir., 165 F.2d 321; United States v. Braunstein, 2 Cir., 168 F.2d 749. Appellant contends nevertheless that the orders are "Final decisions" with......