Klum v. Clinton Trust Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• observing New York enacted the contemporaneous ownership requirement because derivative actions were “very often grossly abused and utilized for reasons disconnected with the interest of the corporation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Bangor Punta Operations, Inc. v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad
  Supreme Court· 1974-06-19· cited 212×
• Rosenthal v. Burry Biscuit Corp.
  Court of Chancery of Delaware· 1948-06-16· cited 91×
• Noel Associates, Inc. v. Merrill
  New York Supreme Court· 1944-11-30· cited 19×
• Bankers Nat. Corp. v. Barr
  S.D. New York· 1945-12-08· cited 15×
• Loew v. Interlake Iron Corp.
  New York Supreme Court· 1944-10-17· cited 4×
• John Solak v. Michael A. Daniels
  Court of Chancery of Delaware· 2025-07-11

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Piccard v. Sperry Corporation
  S.D. New York· 1941-01-31· cited 29×
• Perrott v. United States Banking Corporation
  D. Delaware· 1944-01-24· cited 23×
• Weinberger v. Quinn
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1942-06-19· cited 18×
• Summers v. Hearst
  S.D. New York· 1938-06-07· cited 7×
• Piccard v. Sperry Corporation
  Second Circuit· 1941-06-05· cited 1×