Snyder v. Harris, S 66 C 78.
| Court | United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Missouri) |
| Writing for the Court | Hyman G. Stein and Charles Alan Seigel, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff |
| Citation | 268 F. Supp. 701 |
| Parties | Margaret E. SNYDER, also known as Peg Snyder, Plaintiff, v. Charles HARRIS and Earl W. Kirchhoff, Defendants. |
| Docket Number | No. S 66 C 78.,S 66 C 78. |
| Decision Date | 27 April 1967 |
268 F. Supp. 701
Margaret E. SNYDER, also known as Peg Snyder, Plaintiff,
v.
Charles HARRIS and Earl W. Kirchhoff, Defendants.
No. S 66 C 78.
United States District Court E. D. Missouri, Southeastern Division.
April 27, 1967.
Hyman G. Stein and Charles Alan Seigel, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.
Morris A. Shenker, St. Louis, Mo., for defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
HARPER, Chief Judge.
This matter is before the court on the joint motion of the defendants to dismiss the amended complaint. The motion has been submitted on the briefs of the parties and oral argument.
The plaintiff seeks to bring this action as a class action pursuant to Rule 23, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended July, 1966. The relevant part of the amended complaint alleges that
268 F. Supp. 702
the plaintiff, Margaret E. Snyder, is a citizen of the State of Arizona, and the defendants, Charles Harris and Earl W. Kirchhoff, are citizens of the State of Missouri; that there is diversity of citizenship and the amount in controversy exceeds $10,000.00; that since prior to November 22, 1966, the plaintiff has been a shareholder of Missouri Fidelity/Union Trust Life Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as Missouri Fidelity) and owns two thousand shares of said company; that the By-laws of Missouri Fidelity provide for a Board of Directors consisting of fifteen directors and that the defendants were at all times relevant to this action members of said board of directors; that at all times relevant to this action the market price of Missouri Fidelity was about $2.63 per share; that sometime prior to November 22, 1966, National Western Life Insurance Company (hereinafter referred to as National Western) submitted to the directors of Missouri Fidelity a proposal to purchase from them for $7.00 per share all of the shares of Missouri Fidelity owned by them, conditioned however, that all directors of Missouri Fidelity, except four, resign as directors and that five nominees of National Western be elected as directors of Missouri Fidelity, and that such nominees be designated and elected as a majority of the executive committee and of the investment committee of Missouri Fidelity; that on or about November 22, 1966, National Western, pursuant to its said offer, entered into an agreement with eight of the directors of Missouri Fidelity, including the defendants herein, to pay to them and to friends and relatives of theirs $7.00 per share for an aggregate of approximately 300,000 shares of Missouri Fidelity owned by them, and thereupon and in pursuance of such conduct said eight directors, including the defendants herein, did resign as directors of Missouri Fidelity, and nominees of National Western were designated, named and elected as directors of Missouri Fidelity and as a majority of the executive committee and of the investment committee of Missouri Fidelity; that the aforesaid conduct and acts of the said eight directors, including the defendants, were a breach of trust and a violation of their duties as directors of Missouri Fidelity, and National Western procured said resignations and therefore paid or has agreed to pay the said eight directors who resigned, including the defendants herein, and their friends and relatives, a premium of about $1,200,000.00; and that the aggregate amount paid by National Western for the said shares was approximately $1,200,000.00 in excess of the market value of said shares and was a premium paid by it to the said selling shareholders for the resignations of said directors who resigned and for the obtaining of control of the executive committee and investment committee of Missouri Fidelity
The amended complaint prays for judgment in the amount of $1,200,000.00, said judgment to be entered in favor of the plaintiff and the other individual shareholders (allegedly over 4,000 in number) according to their respective share...
To continue reading
Request your trial
11 practice notes
-
Snyder v. Harris Gas Service Company v. Coburn, Nos. 109
...company and not merely to a few of them. The suit was brought in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, 268 F.Supp. 701, diversity of citizenship being alleged as the basis for federal jurisdiction. Since petitioner's allegations showed that she sought for he......
-
Collins v. Bolton, No. 68C 295.
...Insurance Company, 375 F.2d 992 (5th Cir. 1967), from the Fifth Circuit, and Snyder v. Harris, 390 F.2d 204 (8th Cir. 1968), affirming 268 F.Supp. 701 (E.D.Mo.1967), from the Eighth Circuit, have indicated that aggregation remains proper only when the demands of the plaintiffs are joint and......
-
Dixon v. Northwestern National Bank of Minneapolis, No. 4-66 Civ. 65.
...principles in class action circumstances. See Alvarez v. Pan Am. Life Ins. Co., 375 F.2d 992 (5th Cir. 1967); Snyder v. Harris, 268 F.Supp. 701 (2) This court holds that plaintiffs' claims can be aggregated in this case. Defendant bank urges, which is undoubtedly true, that the plaintiffs h......
-
Berman v. Narragansett Racing Association, No. 7245-7247.
...of the United States, 124 F.2d 788 (7th Cir.1941), cert. denied, 316 U.S. 682, 62 S.Ct. 1270, 86 L.Ed. 1755 (1942); Snyder v. Harris, 268 F.Supp. 701, 704-705 (E.D.Mo.1967), aff'd, 390 F.2d 204 (8th Cir.1968), aff'd, 394 U.S. 332, 89 S.Ct. 1053, 22 L.Ed.2d 319 (1969). Demonstrably, the inst......
Request a trial to view additional results
11 cases
-
Collins v. Bolton, No. 68C 295.
...Insurance Company, 375 F.2d 992 (5th Cir. 1967), from the Fifth Circuit, and Snyder v. Harris, 390 F.2d 204 (8th Cir. 1968), affirming 268 F.Supp. 701 (E.D.Mo.1967), from the Eighth Circuit, have indicated that aggregation remains proper only when the demands of the plaintiffs are joint and......
-
Snyder v. Harris Gas Service Company v. Coburn, Nos. 109
...company and not merely to a few of them. The suit was brought in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, 268 F.Supp. 701, diversity of citizenship being alleged as the basis for federal jurisdiction. Since petitioner's allegations showed that she sought for he......
-
Dixon v. Northwestern National Bank of Minneapolis, No. 4-66 Civ. 65.
...principles in class action circumstances. See Alvarez v. Pan Am. Life Ins. Co., 375 F.2d 992 (5th Cir. 1967); Snyder v. Harris, 268 F.Supp. 701 (2) This court holds that plaintiffs' claims can be aggregated in this case. Defendant bank urges, which is undoubtedly true, that the plaintiffs h......
-
Berman v. Narragansett Racing Association, No. 7245-7247.
...of the United States, 124 F.2d 788 (7th Cir.1941), cert. denied, 316 U.S. 682, 62 S.Ct. 1270, 86 L.Ed. 1755 (1942); Snyder v. Harris, 268 F.Supp. 701, 704-705 (E.D.Mo.1967), aff'd, 390 F.2d 204 (8th Cir.1968), aff'd, 394 U.S. 332, 89 S.Ct. 1053, 22 L.Ed.2d 319 (1969). Demonstrably, the inst......
Request a trial to view additional results