MARKHAM, ALIEN PROPERTY CUSTODIAN,

v.

KALLIMANIS ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (11 total)

• Va. Bankshares, Inc. v. Sandberg, 501 U.S. 1083 (U.S. 1991)
  …cit grounds that although “[statutory appraisal is now considered the exclusive remedy for stockholders opposing a merger,” App. to Pet. for Cert. 32a; see Adams v. United States Distributing Corp., 184 Va. 134, 34 S. E. 2d 244 (1945), cert. denied, 327 U. S. 788 (1946), “dissenting stockholders in bank mergers do not even have this solitary remedy available to them,” because “Va. Code § 6.1-43 specifically excludes bank mergers from application of § 13.1-730 [the Virginia appraisal statute].” App. to Pet. f…
• Scarborough v. Atl. Coast Line R. Co., 178 F.2d 253 (4th Cir. 1949)
  …ment by the defendant which prevent the plaintiff from bringing the action within time. Pollen v. Ford Instrument Co., 2 Cir., 1940, 108 F. 2d 762, 763; United States ex rel. Nitkey v. Dawes, 7 Cir., 1945, 151 F. 2d 639, 644, certiorari denied 1946, 327 U.S. 788, 66 S.Ct. 808 [90 L.Ed. 1015], Section 6 of the Act in question, since its enactment in slightly different form, has been construed to be in this category. Central Vermont R. Co. v. White (supra); Flynn [*258] v. New York, etc., R., 1931, 283 U.S. 5…
• Hardin v. City Title & Escrow Co., 797 F.2d 1037 (D.C. Cir. 1986)
  …3 L.Ed. 460 (1898). Where a time limitation is jurisdictional, it must be strictly construed and will not be tolled or extended on account of fraud. United States ex rel. Nit- [*1041] key v. Dawes, 151 F. 2d 639, 642-44 (7th Cir.1945), cert. denied, 327 U.S. 788, 66 S.Ct. 808, 90 L.Ed. 1015 (1946). Section 2614 provides no grounds for tolling its time limitation, nor does the Act’s legislative history suggest any. Moreover, we interpret Finn and Dawes as holding that where, as here, a time limitation is ju…