Manhattan Eye, Ear and Throat Hospital v. Spitzer Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained скачать в хорошем качестве

Manhattan Eye, Ear and Throat Hospital v. Spitzer Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Manhattan Eye, Ear and Throat Hospital v. Spitzer | 715 N.Y.S.2d 575 (1999) A nonprofit corporation has no shareholders. Because of this lack of internal accountability, a nonprofit’s board of directors is subject to governmental oversight. As we will see in Manhattan Eye, Ear, and Throat Hospital versus Spitzer, this is especially true when the board decided to sell all or substantially all the nonprofit’s assets. Manhattan Eye, Ear, and Throat Hospital was a well respected nonprofit hospital. Manhattan Hospital’s stated purpose was to establish and operate a teaching and research hospital for the treatment of acute illnesses, plastic surgery, and diseases affecting the eye, ear, nose, and throat. Manhattan Hospital primarily operated out of three hospital buildings located on East Sixty Fourth Street but also maintained an outpatient center in Harlem and planned to construct another in Brooklyn. Due to financial concerns, Manhattan Hospital’s board of directors retained a strategic advisor. The advisor expressed the opinion that Manhattan Hospital had no value as an operating business and advised the board to sell the East Sixty Fourth Street facility. The board agreed and didn’t seriously consider alternative proposals designed to preserve the hospital. The board contracted to sell the property for forty one million dollars, despite the appraisal value being closer to fifty five million. The board also planned to terminate Manhattan Hospital’s residency program, close all hospital functions, and transform the Harlem and Brooklyn locations into diagnostic and treatment centers. Manhattan Hospital petitioned the New York Supreme Court for the statutorily required court approval of the sale. In his capacity as New York’s attorney general, Eliot Spitzer opposed the petition. Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/manhatt... The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/manhatt... Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_... Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Facebook ►   / quimbeedotcom   Twitter ►   / quimbeedotcom   #casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries