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

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

Eisenberg (P) sued to enjoin a plan of reorganization and merger. It was a derivative action. Flying Tiger Line, Inc. (D) moved to require P to post security under New York Business Law Section 627. That motion was granted, and P was given 30 days to post $35,000 in security. P did not comply, and the action was dismissed. P appealed. The suit was brought on by a series of corporate maneuvers that left the 4.5 million original shares of the company as those of a holding company rather than those of the operating company. P contends that the end result of the plan was to deprive minority stockholders of any vote or any influence over the affairs of the company. D insists that the complex reorganization was done to bring about diversification without interference from the Civil Aeronautics Board.

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

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