DENICKE ET AL.

v.

ANGLO CALIFORNIA NATIONAL BANK ET AL.; DENICKE V. BRIGHAM ET AL.; AND DOBLE V. BUCK ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Saylor v. Thayer Lindsley, 456 F.2d 896 (2d Cir. 1972)
• Wolf v. Barkes, 348 F.2d 994 (2d Cir. 1965)
  …in consideration for his consenting to the grant of a defendant’s motion for summary judgment, could be recouped to the extent it exceeded a reasonable attorney’s fee. In Denicke v. Anglo California Nat’l Bank, 141 F. 2d 285 (9 Cir.), cert. denied, 323 U.S. 739, 65 S.Ct. 44, 89 L.Ed. 592 (1944), the corporation, which had come under new management, sought and obtained approval of a compromise under rule 23(c); so far as the case has any pertinence, this is only for its implicit holding that when a derivati…
• Clark v. Lomas & Nettleton Fin. Corp., 625 F.2d 49 (5th Cir. 1980)
  …elatively, corporate directors possess inherent authority to compromise such suits. See Saylor v. Lindsley, 456 F. 2d 896, 899-900 (2d Cir. 1972) (Friendly, J.); Denicke v. Anglo California National Bank, 141 F. 2d 285, 288 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 323 U.S. 739, 65 S.Ct. 44, 89 L.Ed. 592 (1944). As with other management functions, however, the power to control corporate litigation presupposes that the directors have no interest in its exercise. See Galef v. Alexander, 615 F. 2d 51, 58-61 (2d Cir. 1980); M…