Photo of Peter J. Sluka

Peter J. Sluka represents individuals and entities in all phases of complex commercial litigation.  Peter focuses his practice on business divorce and intra-company disputes, including at mediation, arbitration, trial, and appeal. Regularly litigating in New York State and Federal Court, Peter handles all aspects of claims between owners of closely-held business entities, including disputes over business valuation, fiduciary duties, governing agreements, capital calls, dilution, shareholder oppression, and dissolution.

This week’s post considers a duo of recent decisions concerning disputes between LLC members over the terms of their operating agreement.  In the first case, the court considered whether to enforce an operating agreement as written despite evidence that the parties actually intended a different deal.  In the second, the court considered whether to enforce an operating agreement where its buyout terms were grossly unfair.  The cases’ different outcomes highlight the outer limits of the parties’ freedom of contract in LLC operating agreements. 
Continue Reading The Operating Agreement Controls, Unless Public Policy Says Otherwise

The interplay between the default rules of the LLC law and the members’ agreement sometimes gets complicated. In a duo of recent decisions from Justice Cohen, that interplay took center-stage when a majority of members invoked the default rules in an attempt to oust the managing member from authority.
Continue Reading A Two-Act Play of LLC Default Rules and Manager Removal

Shareholders considering exercising their right to inspect the corporation’s books and records–particularly in the context of a valuation proceeding under BCL 1118 or 623–would be wise to consider Justice Platkin’s recent primer on different inspection rights and their correspondingly different scopes, conditions precedent, and required justifications.
Continue Reading Justice Platkin’s Primer on Shareholders’ Inspection Rights

In a case featuring your authors as counsel for the prevailing parties, NY County Commercial Division Justice Robert Reed enforces the buy-sell provision of a corporation’s shareholders agreement triggered by the shareholders’ petition for dissolution.
Continue Reading Look Before You Leap: Buy-Sell Agreements Triggered by a Petition for Dissolution

Preliminary injunctions are a powerful tool in the business divorce litigator’s toolbox, and they often involve a race to the courthouse. This week’s post offers a reminder that sometimes, that race is critical; courts will be more inclined to preserve the status quo with a preliminary injunction than to undo action with one. 
Continue Reading Too Little, Too Late: Court Sides with Ousted Member, but Denies Preliminary Injunction Undoing Termination

A corporation and a dissident shareholder enter into agreement where the dissident shareholder agrees to receive regular payments in exchange for staying away from the Company’s business. What happens when the outspoken shareholder dies? In Stile v C-Air Customhouse Brokers-Forwards, Inc., Index No. 656575/2020 [Sup Ct, New York County 2021], the New York County Supreme Court declined to dismiss a suit by the estate of a shareholder subject to a stay away settlement agreement on the grounds that the stay away obligations did not expressly apply to the shareholder’s successors.
Continue Reading Stay Away Settlement Between Closely-Held Corporation and Dissident Shareholder Goes Away Upon Shareholder’s Death

When valuing an owner’s interest in a closely-held company, the calculation and applicability of a discount for lack of marketability is among the most fertile grounds for sharp disagreement. One open question: should the DLOM account for any contractual restrictions on a controlling owner’s ability to transfer his or her control?
Continue Reading Fueling the DLOM Debate: Control Transfer Restrictions and the Discount for Lack of Marketability

In a decision of apparent first impression last month, Justice Nancy Bannon of the Manhattan Supreme Court issued an injunction against the holding of a corporate election under BCL § 619. Minority shareholders facing an anticipated election called by a rival majority would be wise to consider the roadmap to injunctive relief charted by the plaintiffs here. 
Continue Reading Stop the Vote: Injunction Halts Shareholders Meeting Pursuant to Courts’ Broad Power to Review Corporate Elections

If man’s first sin was eating the apple, a business valuator’s greatest sin is mixing apples and oranges. In Dieckman v. Regency GP, LP, Chancellor Bouchard denied the Plaintiff’s bid for $1.6 billion in damages, even after finding that the defendant general partner breached the partnership agreement’s implied duty of good faith and fair dealing.  The decision rests on Chancellor Bouchard’s complete rejection of Plaintiff’s damages calculation on the grounds that it was akin to “comparing apples to oranges.”
Continue Reading General Partner Breached Implied Covenants in Partnership Agreement, but Plaintiff’s “Apples-to-Oranges” Calculation Dooms Bid for Damages