Supreme Court of the United States
Surowitz v. Hilton Hotels Corp.
March 7, 1966383 U.S. 363
Summary
The Supreme Court reversed the district court and Court of Appeals, holding that the dismissal of Mrs. Surowitz’s derivative suit was improper because Rule 23(b)’s verification requirement does not demand the plaintiff’s personal knowledge of the allegations; the case was remanded for trial on the merits. Justice Harlan concurred, arguing that counsel’s affidavit can satisfy verification.
Holding
- Whether a derivative suit may be dismissed under Rule 23(b) when the plaintiff shareholder lacks personal knowledge of the verified allegations.. The dismissal was improper; Rule 23(b) does not require the plaintiff’s personal knowledge, and the suit may proceed.
Docket 161
Cited authorities
- 48 Stat. 74
- 48 Stat. 881