Document: 390 U.S. 606 88 S.Ct. 1332 20 L.Ed.2d 177 J. David STERN, Petitioner,v.SOUTH CHESTER TUBE CO. No. 486. Argued March 25, 1968. Decided April 22, Freeman, Philadelphia, Pa., for petitioner. Richard P. Brown, Jr., respondent. Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Petitioner, a resident New York, who owned stock worth $10,000 or more in respondent South Chester Tube Company, corporation, brought this action United States District Court Eastern Pennsylvania, where was incorporated and maintained its business headquarters. Alleging that corporation had many times denied petitioner's requests to inspect books records as authorized by Pa.Stat.Ann., Tit. 15, § 2852—308B (1958),1 complaint requested court enter an order directing permit such inspection. Jurisdiction invoked under 28 U.S.C. 1332(a), which vests jurisdiction district courts matter controversy exceeds sum parties are citizens different States. The answered, admitting parts allegations denying others. Respondent also moved dismiss lack subject on two following grounds: 2 '1. only relief sought diversity is compel defendant company allow plaintiff, minority shareholder, certain corporate records. Such nature writ mandamus. Under All Writs Act, does not have issue mandamus case sought. 3 '2. * That right inspection any monetary valuation. Since depends upon existence amount capable valuation (in excess $10,000), no exists Court.' 4 dismissed first ground motion, 252 F.Supp. 329 (D.C.E.D.Pa.1966), Appeals affirmed same ground, 378 F.2d 205 (C.A.3d Cir. 1967). For reasons be stated we hold these rulings point were erroneous reverse judgment below. 5 below viewed effect plea relied long line cases interpreted Act2 deny power when it A mandamus, so hold, can aid acquired grant some other form relief. See M'Intire v. Wood, 7 Cranch 504, L.Ed. 420 (1813); Rosenbaum Bauer, 120 450, 633, 30 743 (1887); Covington & C Bridge Co. Hager, 203 109, 27 24, 51 111 (1906). We think, however, erred concluding here 'mandamus' within meaning cases. Practically all involved original sense—a suit against public officer performance 'ministerial' duty. Although word frequently used describe orders affirmative private parties, considerations come into play certainly differ from problems seek officials. 6 So far aware, there one has held federal without party. In Knapp Lake Shore M R. Co., 197 536, 25 538, 49 870 (1905), Interstate Commerce Commission filed 'petition mandamus' court, seeking railroad file reports required Act. applied principle earlier involving officers would lie defendant. But careful note might available 'writ injunction proper process, mandatory otherwise.' Id., at 543, 539. distinction drawn between seems formalistic present day age, but must remembered decided before simplification rules pleading and, importantly, merger law equity. could issued law, while injunction, whether prohibitive, equitable remedy, referred familiar judicial system time. need now decide properly extended bar suits even injunctions survive equity pleading. petitioner did fall trap using possibly fatal label, 'mandamus'; instead he simply asked 'to plaintiff examine (its records).' Thus, broadest possible reading decision, Act here. 8 find judge-made, statutory, constitutional, bars granting remedy Petitioner undoubtedly right, substantive State, holds stock, since adequate traditional power. provided absence similar state Skelly Oil Phillips Petroleum 339 667, 674, 70 876, 880, 94 1194 (1950); cf. Guffey Smith, 237 101, 35 526, 59 856 (1915), because clear provides enforcement shareholder's compulsory order. 12, 1911 (1967). While State labels 'mandamus,' what Pennsylvania statute actually authorize corporations their shareholders, label practice course bearing question kind Consequently enforce state-granted 9 reversed cause remanded further proceedings consistent with opinion. 10 It ordered. 11 Reversed remanded. 'Every shareholder shall examine, person agent attorney, reasonable time times, purpose, share register, account, shareholders directors, make extracts therefrom.' Stat. 81 (1789), amended, 1651(a): 'The Supreme established Congress may writs necessary appropriate respective jurisdictions agreeable usages principles law.'

Category: 8