# H F G Co. v. Pioneer Pub. Co.

> Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · May 23, 1947 · 162 F.2d 536

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9651316

## Case

- **Full name:** H F G Co. v. Pioneer Pub. Co.
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
- **Decided:** May 23, 1947
- **Citations:** 162 F.2d 536
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Lindley
- **Judges:** Major and Minton, Circuit Judges, and Lindley, District Judge
- **Cited by:** 32 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/9651316

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that beneficial owner of stock who was not a shareholder of record had standing to assert derivative claims on behalf of corporation

## Opinion text

LINDLEY, District Judge
(concurring).
I agree that the judgment should be reversed, but 1 would employ somewhat different reasoning. Rule 23(b) of the Federal Rules of Procedure is clearly of procedural character. Its function is to endow a shareholder with the right to maintain a suit such as this. But who constitutes a shareholder, it seems to me, is a question of substantive law, which under Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 , 58 S.Ct. 817 , 82 L.Ed. 1188 , 114 A.L.R. 1487 , must be determined by the law of the state. In other words, the status of plaintiff who claims to be a stockholder is a question of Illinois law. Under that law, plaintiff’s status is that of a shareholder, as pointed out in Judge Major’s opinion. Hence it has a right to maintain the suit as provided in Rule 23(b).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9651316. Public record. Not legal advice.