Sometimes the tax collector can prove the bigger impediment to minority shareholder claims than the majority shareholders, as explained in this week’s New York Business Divorce featuring a recent case involving a Delaware corporation whose charter was voided for nonpayment of taxes.
Continue Reading

Justice Elizabeth Emerson’s recent decision in Sardis v Sardis, denying a fee application under Section 626 (e) of the Business Corporation Law, is essential reading for counsel involved in shareholder derivative actions. Get the story in this week’s New York Business Divorce.
Continue Reading

This week’s New York Business Divorce revisits a family feud involving a Brooklyn-based food distributor and affiliated realty company, in which an ousted minority owner was on the short end of a series of recent decisions by Justice Sylvia Ash.
Continue Reading

The Manhattan Commercial Division recently dismissed derivative claims by a partner in a family-owned realty partnership based on conflicts of interest and his “litigious nature”. Learn more about this unusual and instructive case in this week’s New York Business Divorce.
Continue Reading

The lesson of the case highlighted in this week’s New York Business Divorce is simple: Don’t file for dissolution under the shareholder oppression and looting statute unless you’re prepared for the opposing shareholders to elect to purchase your shares for fair value, because you may not be able to walk it back.
Continue Reading

New York’s statutes authorizing a judicial dissolution petition by oppressed minority shareholders, and granting respondents a corresponding right to elect to purchase the petitioner’s shares, include a provision for a “surcharge” upon controlling shareholders for wrongful dissipation or transfer of corporate assets. It’s a rarely litigated provision, as evidenced by a court decision last month which may be the first ever reported case in which a surcharge claim was upheld. Learn more in this week’s New York Business Divorce.
Continue Reading

The LLC majority members in Bonanni v. Horizons Investors Corp., were ordered to pay the piper in a post-trial decision earlier this month by Justice Elizabeth Emerson in a 10-year old case, finding that they had converted the plaintiff’s minority membership interest. It’s in this week’s New York Business Divorce.
Continue Reading