When reading a recent New Jersey court’s opinion regarding an employee of an LLC claiming to have been given a share of ownership of the company by its sole owner, I couldn’t help but think of method acting – the technique in which “an actor aspires to encourage sincere and emotionally expressive performances by fully
Litigation
WHEN IT COMES TO AIDING AND ABETTING CLAIMS IN PENNSYLVANIA, (ACTUAL) KNOWLEDGE IS POWER
I recently covered whether parties can be liable for a claim of aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty in Pennsylvania.
In that post, I explained the two different frameworks for these claims that have been established by Pennsylvania courts. Both contain a knowledge requirement. One framework requires “knowledge of the breach by the aider…
WHAT ARE THE ALI PRINCIPLES OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE GOOD FOR IN PENNSYLVANIA? NOT VERY MUCH.
The American Law Institute recently announced its plans to draft a Restatement of the Law of Corporate Governance. (https://www.ali.org/projects/show/corporate-governance/#_participants). This is ALI’s second attempt at such a restatement.
Stephen Bainbridge, a professor at the UCLA School of Law and a widely respected voice on corporate governance, pejoratively describes the first effort in the…
AIDING AND ABETTING BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY? PENNSYLVANIA BUSINESS DIVORCE LITIGATION IS GOING TO GET MORE INTERESTING
In Pennsylvania, can you be liable for someone else’s breach of their fiduciary duty to a co-owner of a closely held business if you knew about the breach, were somehow involved with it, and assisted or encouraged that person’s breach?
Section 876 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts addresses the civil tort (but not the…
WAIVING JUDICIAL DISSOLUTION IN PENNSYLVANIA: NOT HAPPENING, BUT THAT MAY BE OKAY.
When two or more people become owners of a limited liability company and embody their relationship in an operating agreement, they usually see sunshine and rainbows in their future. They have an idea, they have a corporate structure, and they have each other.
But there comes a point in the life of many a multi-member…
DEMYSTIFYING INDIVIDUAL AND DERIVATIVE CLAIMS IN CLOSELY HELD CORPORATE DISPUTES
You represent a minority shareholder of a closely-held corporation and the company is having an off year. The majority shareholder is the sole member of the board and serves in every officer position. She draws significant compensation. Without a business justification, she unilaterally decides to double her salary and have the company pay the mortgage…
PA. SUPREME COURT TACKLES ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE ISSUES IN DERIVATIVE CASES
This column previously analyzed the Commonwealth Court’s decision in Pittsburgh History and Landmarks Foundation, 161 A.3d 394 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017), and its potential impact on the attorney-client privilege in derivative litigation. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court subsequently granted petitions for allowance of appeal in the case, setting the stage for the court’s first decision…
THE HAZARDS OF ‘WEAPONIZING’ CAPITAL CALL AND DILUTION PROVISIONS
There are many ways that an owner of a closely-held business can use their superior financial resources to gain an advantage over their co-owners in a dispute. One common way is the use of a capital call provision to dilute the interest of minority owners or to create off-setting claims against them. “Weaponizing” capital call…
OWNERSHIP DISPUTE – PAY ATTENTION TO SCHEDULE K-1
In a perfect world, groups of potential business partners would sit down before they started their new ventures to hash out the details of their relationship. They would work in close consultation with one or more attorneys to produce detailed subscription, operating and loan agreements documenting their arrangements and clearly delineating responsibilities. In the real…