# Miriam J. Wolf v. Curtis Barkes

> Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · June 21, 1965 · 348 F.2d 994

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9450956

## Case

- **Full name:** Miriam J. WOLF, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Curtis BARKES Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
- **Decided:** June 21, 1965
- **Citations:** 348 F.2d 994; 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 5174
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Waterman
- **Judges:** Waterman, Friendly, Anderson
- **Cited by:** 21 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9450956

## Opinion text

WATERMAN, Circuit Judge
(concurring) :
Reluctantly persuaded by the convincing language of my brother FRIENDLY, I concur in the result my colleagues here reach. I am of the belief that it would have been better judicial administration for the learned judge below to have granted a preliminary injunction restraining the corporation from settling, compromising, or issuing releases. Thereby there would have been preserved for all the parties the situation plaintiff was complaining of until final resolution of plaintiff’s claims on their merits. Nevertheless, I am persuaded that the unwillingness of the district court to employ the resources available to it within well recognized equity jurisdiction principles is not unreasonable in view of the likelihood that any releases the corporation may have issued will be suspect, the beneficiaries of the compromises made with the corporation will probably remain solvent and will themselves, in the event plaintiff finally substantiates her case, be subject to account to the corporation in whose interest plaintiff has commenced her action.
Moreover, I agree that the language of Rule 23(c), the Rule upon which plaintiff bottomed her motion, does not specifically direct that the trial judge grant the preserving injunction plaintiff requested.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9450956. Public record. Not legal advice.