Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)

Citation: Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Parent Document: Findley v. Garrett, 109 Cal. App. 2d 166 (1952)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 1952-02-08
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1138834/findley-v-garrett/ ↗

Full Text

801 chars

Plaintiff Cohen first learned of the alleged acts of defendants in September, 1948, when he read, in the Wall Street Journal of September 25, 1948, an article summarizing the Findley suit. (In the original complaint, Findley alone was suing on behalf of the stockholders.) Prior thereto plaintiff Cohen imposed confidence in the directors of Douglas and relied upon their integrity, and he had no cause to suspect the violations of the fiduciary obligations of defendant directors of Douglas or to suspect the activities of the other defendants in conspiring with said directors. Plaintiffs and the other stockholders of Douglas could not have discovered the said acts prior to May, 1948, because the acts were of a self-concealing nature and were actively concealed by the individual defendants. *172

Other Sections in This Document (69)

Full Text