Shareholders Flashcards
Shareholder Management
Generally, shareholders have no direct control in management.
- they can act in their personal interests
- have no fiduciary duty to corporation or fellow shareholders
Shareholder Liability
Limited to liabilities for unpaid stock, a pierced corporate veil, or the absence of a de facto corporation.
Close Corporations
Shareholders can run the corporation directly in a close corporation.
Close corporations:
- do not publicly trade stock
- have few shareholders
- can set up management differently (can eliminate the board; have shareholders run business; etc.)
How do you set up management differently in a close corporation?
By executing a shareholder management agreement. Can be executed by: (1) including it in the articles and approval by ALL shareholders; or (2) by unanimous written shareholder consent.
Whoever manages = owes the duty of care and loyalty
Special Fiduciary Duties in Close Corporations
Many states: courts impose a fiduciary duty on shareholders owed to other shareholders
- duty of controlling shareholders to minority shareholders: controlling shareholders cannot use their power to benefit at the expense of minority. Also have a duty to disclose material information to minority.
- oppression of minority: shareholders being oppressed can sue for breach.
Can shareholders be held liable for corporate debts?
Shareholders generally cannot be held liable for corporate debts UNLESS a court pierces the corporate veil.
** YOU CAN ONLY PIERCE THE CORPORATE VEIL IN CLOSE CORPORATIONS.
PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL
To pierce the veil and hold shareholders personally liable:
- the shareholders must have abused the privilege of incorporating; and
- fairness must require holding them liable
Courts will pierce to avoid fraud or unfairness by shareholders in a close corporation. Something like sloppy administration is not enough.
Common scenarios for piercing the corporate veil
- Alter Ego (Identity of Interests)
- if corporation is “mere instrumentality” of the shareholders + injustice occurs = court might pierce - Undercapitalization
- at time of formation, not enough capital to cover prospective liabilities - Fraud, Avoidance of Existing Obligations, or Evasion of Statutory Provisions
- court can pierce to prevent fraud or avoidance of existing obligations; avoiding future personal liability however is not a good enough reason
If the veil is pierced, who is held liable?
Only the shareholders who were active in the operation of the business. In that case, they will have joint and several liability.
Remember: shareholder could be another corporation (bc corp = person)
Derivative Suit
In a deriv. suit, the shareholder is suing to enforce the corporation’s claim, not her own personal claim.
Question: Could the corporation have brought this suit? If so, it’s a derivative claim.
Direct Action
A direction action may be brought for a breach of fid. duty owed to the shareholder by an officer/director. To distinguish this from a derivative suit, ask: (1) who suffers the most immediate and direct damage: the corp. or the shareholder; and (2) to whom did the defendant’s duty run: the corp. or shareholder?
In a shareholder direct action: any recovery is for the benefit of an individual shareholder.
Requirements of a Derivative Suit
- Standing - must own (or have inherited) stock at time of wrong and fairly & adequately represent corporation’s interest
- Demand Requirements
MBCA: Shareholder must make written demand on corporation to take action.
Some states: demand + 90 day waiting period UNLESS (1) corp rejected demand; or (2) irreparable injury would result by waiting 90 days.
**Other states: **demand not required if futile
3. Corporation Joined as Defendant
Dismissal of Derivative Suit
- dismissal or settlement may occur only with court approval
- dismissal proper if suit is not in corporation’s best interests & based on independent investigation
- most states: court will dismiss if court finds (1) committee was truly independent; and (2) reasonable investigation was made
Burden of Proof in Derivative Suits
Shareholder has burden of proving decision was made in bad faith
BUT if majority of shareholders had a personal interest in the controversy, burden shifts on corporation to show good faith