126 Henry St., Inc. v. Cater

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that former CEO had acquiesced to his removal by his recognition of the removal and his subsequent conduct
• concluding that the defendant had acquiesced in the boards’ acts to remove him as chief executive officer
• holding that voidable act was “properly subject to equitable defenses” and finding that challenge was “barred by the doctrine of acquiescence”
• holding that voidable act was “properly subject to equitable defenses” and finding that challenge was “barred by the doctrine of acquiescence”
• holding that voidable act was “properly subject to equitable defenses” and finding that challenge was “barred by the doctrine of acquiescence”
• noting that element of acquiescence defense is that claimant freely does something that amounts to recognition of complained-of act

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).