Brown v. Tenney

How courts have described this case

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

• holding “a double derivative action may be maintained by a shareholder of record in a holding company, on behalf of a subsidiary controlled or dominated by the holding company . . . .”
• derivative suit is a “device to protect shareholders against abuses by the corporation, its officers and directors, and is a vehicle to insure corporate accountability”
• the real owner of the subsidiary is not the holding company but rather the holding company shareholders
• derivative suit is a “device to protect shareholders against abuses by the corporation, its officers and directors, and is a vehicle to insure corporate accountability”
• “a double derivative action may be maintained by a shareholder of record in a holding company, after due demand is made to, and rejected by, the subsidiary and the holding company”
• derivative suit is a “device to protect shareholders against abuses by the corporation, its officers and directors, and is a vehicle to insure corporate accountability”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).