The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Cohen (P) was required under state statute to post security bond for expenses in a shareholder derivative action suit. The district court denied D's motion for the bond. P's initial complaint alleged that since 1929, the individual defendants engaged in a continuing and successful conspiracy to enrich themselves at the expense of the corporation. The assets that were alleged to be wasted or diverted were in excess of $100,000,000. A demand was made to the corporation but it was prevented from addressing the issue as Ds controlled the company board. P sued in 1943 and 1945 New Jersey enacted the statute that required the posting of a security bond for expenses in a shareholder derivative action suit. The court of appeals reversed, and the Supreme Court granted certiorari.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.