Download - Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
1/44
BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS
OUTLINE
TYPES OF BUSINESS STRUCTURES
What you want to know in counseling client on how business should be organizedPurpose of business (product/service, profit/nonprofit)
How big; how long it will take to make a profit; when will you make thatprofit
If there will be lossesDistribution of profit/dividends (or keep money it earns in the business)If short-term business proposition or long-term (if children will inherit, likelyownership will change)*If liabilities, who will bear them
Product, Employee/Vicarious
DebtCreditors
Investorpassive or active, how many , how business will be financedInsuring risksHow many people will be involved (owners and employees)Location of business*Taxes (subject to tax, which bracket)*Who manages/*Who owns*Transferability
Easy to leave business or notClients objectives can help determine which organization to pick, what stage business is
in (could develop as general partnership and evolve into corporation)Ownership Management Liability Taxes Transferability
Sole Proprietorship One Owner Personal Personal No form as legaentity; assets cansold but no businto sell
General Partnership Two or More Partners 50-50 or eachis 100% liable(joint andseveral)
Pass-through (onpersonal taxreturns)
Partnership intercan be sold
Corporation (C
Corp.)
Shareholders Owners or
Employees(centralizedmgmt.)
Only on the
corporation,limited(ownerslimited to amtof capitalcontributed)
Double taxation
(business filesand distributesmoney to ownerswho paypersonal taxes)
Relatively easy t
sell all or part ofcorp.
Corporation (SCorp.)
Shareholdersmust be natural
Owners orEmployees
Limited Pass-Through Relatively Easy
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
2/44
persons and UScitizens (max of100)
Limited Partnership One or moregeneral, one or
more limited
Generalpartner is
active, limitedis passive(investor)
GPPersonalLP- Limited
Pass-Through Difficult
Limited LiabilityCompany
May have 1 ormore
By Employeesor Owners
Limited Pass-Through Difficult
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
I. Purpose of a Financial Statementgauge of judging how healthy a businessis/measuring device (owners can determine how they are doing)
Summarizes 3 aspects
Measure of own profitsConvince others to invest (Show 3rd parties)Can take variety of forms
3 partsBalance sheet, Profit and Loss/Operating Statement, CashFlow
II. Balance SheetTo show assets and liabilities of businessNet worth is classified as equity
III. Statement of Income/OperationsRevenuegive results as profit or lossRecord of that years operations
IV. Cash FlowWhere is money coming from and where is it goingWhether there is enough cash to keep the business going
Financial statements tell us where company has been, not where its going(picture of financial position at a point in time)
Financial statements do not look forward (new customers, technology,event that will propel corporation to be more successful)
Financial statements do not predict the futureIntellectual property is not on the balance sheet
Still have cash = still in business (cash flow)
SOLE PROPRIETORSHIPS
Owned, operated and managed by one personNo formalities in forming sole proprietorship
AGENCY
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
3/44
Someone with authority to act for someone elseagentGorton v. Dotycoach driving parents car gets into accident
Plaintiff argued Doty was the principal, coach was agent, assigned to drive her carIn principal/agent relationship, principal asks person to act for and on theirbehalf, that person become agent
Opportunity under law to make someone responsible for conductof anotherStrategic decision to hold principal liablemake himresponsible
Case predates Law of AgencyNow in Restatement
Actual, consensual relationshipPrincipal appoints agentAgent accepts appointmentPrincipal controls agents conduct (agent acts withinauthority and under control of principal)
Fiduciary Duty (seen in partnerships and corporate law)
PRINCIPALS AND AGENTS
I. Fiduciary RelationshipAttorney-ClientAgent gives undivided loyalty to best interest of principalConfidentiality, Agent has duty to keep confidences privateAccountability, agent must account to principalDiligence, agent must exercise reasonable diligence in carrying outbusiness of principal
II. Scope of EmploymentArguello v. Conocoracist gas station attendant
Company-owned vs. branded stationsDefendant argued independent contractorcannot control day-to-day activitiesMust control means, manner and method
III. Agency TypesActual/Expressagents with actual authority
Client hires a lawyer, told lawyer to do his taxes (express)Implied/Inherentprincipal does not authorize agent to act
Authority is implicit in actual authority given
Explicit to do taxesimplied to contact IRSMill Street v. Hoganpaint church
Hired brother, ladder broke and brother was injuredDid Bill, as agent, have authority to hire someone else?
Actual authority circumstantially proven which theprincipal actually intended the agent to possess andincludes such powers as are practically necessary tocarry out the duties actually delegated
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
4/44
Apparent Authoritycreated by manifestations of principal to 3rd partyManifestation must be attributable to principal, must lead 3rd partyto reasonably conclude that someone is an agent for the principal
Communication must come from principalHayes v. National Service Industrieswrongful discharge
Plaintiff argues she did not give authority for her attorney to settleDecided on apparent authority, believed he had actual authorityGeorgia lawlawyers have apparent authorityBut lawyer told third party, not client (principal)
Better argument for implied authorityattorney could negotiatesettlement
LIABILITY
EMPR/EMPEE AGENTS ICCONTROL yes no
TORTS yes no
CONTRACTS yes/no (scope of emp.) yes/no (depends on auth.)
Independent Contractor has control over means, manner and method of their workAgents
Can create obligations and liabilities for principalsCan bind 3rd parties to principalPrincipal appoints agent who accepts and carries out direction (express)How apparent authority is created
Only established by purported principal makingmanifestation/communication to a 3rd party that the business/person is thatprincipals agent
Agent claims to be an agentdoes so at their own liabilityWhere party attempts to disclaim agency, if principal has accepted the benefits of thebargain, they cannot disclaim agency
PARTNERS AND PARTNERSHIPS
I. In Re: Estate of FenimoreReceipt of part of profits is prima facie evidence that person is a partner
(partners collect after creditors)RUPA gap-fillers apply when agreement is unclear
She would be obligated as a partner for debts of the businessCould avoid this by explicitly stating it was a loan, terms of agreement,promissory note
II. RUPAlaw in most states, including AZSection 202Formation of a Partnership
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
5/44
Association of two or more persons to carry on a business, whetherthey intended to be partners or not
Section 103Effect of Partnership Agreement; Non-waivable ProvisionsRelations among partners and between partners and the partnershipare governed by partnership agreement. To the extent partnership
agreement does not otherwise provide, Act governs relationsamong the partners and between the partners and the partnership.Relations of partners to each other and third parties iscontrolled by the partnership agreementRUPA only applies when there is a deficiency in theagreement or if no partnership agreement
Why do lawyers encourage agreements if there is a statute?RUPA gives law about general partnership, could be verydifferent legal results than intended partnershipsRUPA assumes its two or more people, small businesses,partners actively engaged in day-to-day business and share
in management and profits and losses of the businessSection 306Partners LiabilityAll partners are liable jointly and severally for all obligations ofthe partnership
Section 301Partner Agent of PartnershipEach partner is an agent of the partnership
Have actual, inherent and apparent authorityIII. General Partnership
Ownership or Two or MoreManagement equally by partnersTaxation pass-throughLiabilityjoint and severalTransferabilitydifficulta. More likely in a general partnership and did not know it (inadvertent
Fenimore)b. National Biscuit Company v. StroudGP between Stroud and Freeman,
dispute regarding sales of breadStroudclaimed no personal responsibility for bread sold by P to grocerystoreFreeman kept creating liability by ordering bread
With respect to 3rd
parties, partners stand equal as agents ofpartnership3
rdparty can argue apparent authority if agreement said partner
could not enter into contracts with 3rd partiesPartnership Agreementenforceable between 2 parties butas to rest of world, cannot change partnership law (jointand several liability)
Look first at partnership agreement to determine roles; otherwise, equalRUPA401f
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
6/44
Each partner has equal rights in the management and conduct ofthe partnership business
401jA difference arising as to a matter in the ordinary course ofbusiness of a partnership may be decided by a majority of the partners; anact outside the ordinary course of business of a partnership and an
amendment3 partnersshould be based on ownership percentage ofpartnership but absent partnership agreementRUPA
401b Each partner is entitled to an equal share of thepartnership profits and is chargeable with a share of thepartnership losses in proportion to the partners share of theprofits
IV. Law of Partnershipa. Pertinent Sections of RUPA
103Agreementin absence of partnership agreement, this isdefault
202Formation301Relative to 3rd
Parties401Relative to Each Other
BProfitsFManagementCIndemnityINew PartnersJDecisions
502, 503Transfer of Instrument305, 306, 307Liabilities601, 602, 603Exit
b. ProblemRUPA assumes small, dispute=vote, partners dividing profitsand losses equally (set of assumptions)
V. Meinhard v. Salmonplanning to refurbish apartment building, Salmonleased from Gerry, Meinhard provided money to Salmon for renovationsHad partnership with partnership agreementGerry and Salmon entered into agreement without Meinhard
Concept of fiduciary duty; duty of highest loyaltyBusiness trumped by fiduciary duties
Fiduciary will not put interest over interest of partnerNo duty if completely separate to the ventureTipping point?If deal is brought to partner, in what capacity is 3
rdparty
approaching that partner?Salmon came into it as role of agent with respect to partnership
VI. Liabilitiesa. RUPA sections 305, 306, 307
RUPA 305A partnership is liable for obligations of partner306joint and several liability306badmitted as partner, not personally liable for claims incurred by thepartnership prior to admission
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
7/44
401(c)as between partners, if one partner creates liability for partnershipnot authorized to create, must indemnify partnership and partner
Problempartner is still an agent to partnership, right ofindemnification only as good as the partner (cannot protect selffrom joint and several liability)
307b, c and d
Proceed against partnership, judgment against partnershipthat goes unsatisfied, can go to individual partners since they are jointlyand severally liable703dissociation
Does not relieve obligations incurred during tenancy of partnership703bpartner who withdraws is liable as partner to 3rd party fortwo years after you left (apparent authority)
VII. Transferabilitya. Section 502only transferable interest of a partner in the partnership is
the partners share of the profits and losses of the partnership and thepartners right to receive distribution; interest is personal property
i.
Cannot sell interest without permission of the partnersSection401iBut partner can convey economic interest in the partnership(get profits and losses but wont be a partner)
b. RUPAdefault statutedoes not apply unless no partnership agreementor insufficient partnership agreement
Business law is essentially pro-business; individuals better capableof looking out for their own best interest than the law
c. Bohatch v. Butler & Binionpartners terminated, exit from partnershipSuspected partner was overcharging; terminated after discoveredaccusations ill-founded
Argues partnership law is fiduciary law, partnership has fiduciaryduty to terminated partner
Courtno fiduciary duty to keep a partner because it is an at-willrelationship
Law allows expulsion of partnerEntitled to contract damages, though, breach of contract
d. Creel v. LillySurviving spouse sues partnership to dissolve businessUnder common law, any of the events like death would dissolve thepartnership
What RUPA did not embracewithdrawal of partner does notdissolve partnership
Section 601DissociationEquivalent to withdrawal (expulsion, notice, death, etc.)As opposed to dissolutiontermination and liquidation
Two Types of Partnerships1. At Willif do not have time limit in partnership agreement
termination and liquidation)2. For Termagreement says it expires in certain amount of time
or when purpose of partnership is achieved
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
8/44
Withdrawal of partner does not affect dissolution701In partnership for term and die, will be bought out bypartnership
VIII. Form GPcan mitigate things you do not likeHave wellwritten agreement
Require partners keep capital in business, indemnification provisionsInsure around risk
CORPORATIONS/FORMATION/STOCK ISSUANCE
I. FormationCorporations, like partnerships, are a creature of statute (based on State)
MBCAlaw in most states, including AZNo such thing as federal corporate lawNo such thing as a federal corporation
a. General corporation laws of a state are not a gap filler, state law is THELAW
b. Other sources with State Lawi. Articles of Incorporation - only public contract governing
operations of corporationii. Bylawsinternal rules of organization, can be changed at any time
by Directors without even telling owners of businessiii. Case Law
c. Characteristicsi. Ownership1 or more; Concept that ownership of corporations is
not necessarily tied to organization, management or future ofbusiness
Partnershippartner dies, general partnership dissolvesLife span similar to sole proprietorship
For corporations, it is PERPETUAL EXISTENCE (cancontinue forever)ownership may trade withoutinterruption
ii. Managementoften can be and is separate from ownershipCharacterized as CENTRALIZEDmanagement isisolated from ownership
Owners may be passive but interested, do notparticipate in running organization
iii. Liabilitylimited, no personal liability for shareholders or ownersJoint and several liability among ownersOwners may stand to lose investment but thats it
iv. Taxesdouble, corporations net expenses from revenueprofitpay taxes at end of fiscal yeartaxes paid at corporate rate
If corporation passes profits onto shareholders or owners,individual must show it on personal income tax
v. Transferabilitycan be easy; form of stock/shares, may becontractual restrictions
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
9/44
d. Facilitates wealth formation by committing investor capital to riskyventures
e. Two Typesi. Publicregisters corporation with regulatory authorities; freely
transferable shares; shareholders are anonymous to managers;
usually large, publicly-traded1. Transparent, required by lawa. Know management and qualifications, their pay,
right to voteb. Law requires it disclose financial situation
(borrowing money, raising capital, etc.)ii. Privateowned by one or a few people; may trade between family
members and investors (privately-held or close corporation);designation that corporation has number of shareholders likelyknown to each other and interested and may participate inbusiness; no newcomers can come in to ownership without
contractual undertakingf. MBCAi. Section 1.40Definitions
Articles of IncorporationCorporation means for-profit, not a foreign corporationForeign Corporationincorporated under law other thanlaw of this stateNonprofitShareholderShares
ii. Section 2.01Incorporators not necessarily founderusuallyLawyers
iii. Section 2.02Articles of Incorporationiv. Section 2.03Corporations existence begins when Articles of
Incorporation are filedRisk1. Until corporation formed, do not have benefit of limited
liabilityv. Section 3.01Purposes
vi. Section 4.01Corporate Namesignals limited liabilityII. Stock Issuance
a. SharesSection 6.21Decision made by BoardConsideration can be anythingcash, property, notes, services(corporation can be capitalized through consideration)
b. Authorizedhow many shares a corporation may issueMaking determinationmake it big number to accommodatepossible future holders
Can continue to issue share after share without restrictionc. Issuedhow may stocks are actually issued; determine what number to
issue to shareholders for what consideration
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
10/44
i. Number of shares issued depends on capital, price determined onhow much you can get per share (could be more or less than lastissuance of shares)
d. Outstandingshares that remain in hands of shareholderse. ClassesPreferred (Class A, B C)f.
SeriesInside a ClassClass A shares have certain rights, subset Series 1has additional rights
i. 6.01distinguishing designation for each Class or Seriesg. 6.03cCommon Stock
Share proportionally to total issued shares of your rightsTells how many votes you have, what percentage ofcompany (share represents ownership of company)
Liquidate companyget same percentage of company, return toowners the assets of the corporation
i. Preferred StockMust have common, can have preferred stock
Rights superior to common stockholdersh. Possibilities for Preferencesi. Liquidationpreferred payouts, first dibs before common
stockholders get anythingii. Dividendsget paid first or will pay 8% dividend on my shares
every year (common stockholdersno rights to dividends)iii. Votingcould take legal form, entitled to 2 votes for every share
they own; my class of shares is entitled to 1 director (can put 1Director on BOD)
iv. Redemptionright to get money back from corporation, havecorporation buy their stock back at a date certain or at an event(required to buy back shares for money they paid)
Corporation established preferred class to make it attractive and bring insignificant level of capital
i. Par ValueA legacy concept, example of how law has evolved to simplifyWhen authorize capital stock, going to say authorize 1M shares incommon stock, $1 value never sell below par value
Problemmust amend Articles and get shareholders to agree toreduce par value if needed
Lawyers often set Par Value at 1 penny or lessj. Discovering outstanding, authorized, issued shares, etc.
Financial Statements, specifically Balance SheetsIII. Limited Liability/Corporate Veil
a. Section 6.22Only exposure investor has is the amount he paid, limitedliability
Once shares are issued for full consideration, they are notassessableOnce you pay consideration for shares, all you have at risk is whatyou pay for those shares
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
11/44
b. DeWitt Truck Brokers v. W. Ray Flemming FruitContract - Flemming and DeWitt; F did not pay billDefendant is F PERSONALLY, NOT CORP.
Piercing the Corporate VeilNo StatuteJudicially-created concept (standards vary
from state to state and case to case)c. Concept of the Corporate Veil3rdParties can ignore corporateness and ignore shareholder orfirst go to corporate assets until exhausted then go to shareholderuntil debt is satisfiedAccording to Flemming Courtconcepts to determine when topierce the veil
1. No formal meetings of BOD (expect BOD to meet toconduct business)
2. Took money out even though not authorized by BOD3. F owned 90% of stock
Personal liability does not look to only oneshareholder4. Never had evidence BOD was ever elected5. No shares/stocks were issued6. Although corporation formed, never treated like a
corporationMUST ENTER INTO TRANSACTIONS IN ACORPORATE FASHION
SHOWS LACK OF CORPORATE FORMALITIES7. Business was undercapitalized
Sometimes this happensbut look at business frombeginning of its time up to date of claim, amount ofmoney it would routinely take to pay itscreditors/bills
F would just take corporate money and put itin his pocket (whenever money in business)eliminated cushion for creditors
8. Alter Ego/InstrumentalityF was alter ego of corporationShareholder(s) treat business as own personalfinancesCommingling of funds or other assets; corporationis not only under the influence and governed by thatperson, but there is such a unity of interest andownership that the individuality or separateness ofsuch person and corporation has ceased
Court will look at totality of circumstancesd. In Re Silicone Breast Implants Liability LitigationBristolmedical
engineering corp. (parentownership interest in MEC/formed MEC)MEC is subsidiary corp. for implants
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
12/44
Manufactured and sold productClass action suittrying to pierce the corporate veil(Bristol has the money, MEC cannot satisfy claim)
Some evidence of LACK OF CORPORATE FORMALITIESsubstantialdomination
Parent and subsidiary had common directors/officers (common)File consolidated financial statements and tax returns (legallyrequired)Parent finances subsidiary (common)Subsidiary operates with grossly inadequate capital (strongerargument)Daily operations not kept separate (problematic for Bristol)
Could have brought under Agencyapparent authoritye. Cannot go to other subsidiaries, can only argue getting to a parent
(enterprise liability)f. When piercing case, it is exception to the lawlaw is limited liability
Having one or two owners makes piercing more likely to happenMore likely treating it as his own business/comminglingfunds
g. Four Theoriesi. Fraudcollecting money while claiming to provide services
ii. Failure to follow corporate formalitiesiii. Alter Egoiv. Undercapitalization
IV. Corporate Governancewho gets to decide what; who is responsible to what?a. Duties of Board and Officers
i. Management/Decision-MakingConcept of centralized management
Separation of management from its ownersii. Pyramid (reality is more upside down)
Bottom: Shareholdershave least amount of controlMiddle: BODtrying to figure out roleTop: Officershave the most power
iii. Policy IssuesShareholders should have more power, BOD more responsibility,Management less power?
iv. ShareholdersRole and Powernot exactly one-size fits all (depends on numberof shareholders)Have voting rights for BOD6.03ca corporation cannot exist without common stockcommon stock must have voting rights
7.01a, 7.21, 7.28
All Statute confers on shareholders is limited right to vote, solely once ayear at an annual meeting and solely with respect to election of Directorsand solely on plurality (not majority)
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
13/44
No right of shareholders to have a vote on operations, product we make,etc.
b. Board of Directors8.01each corporation required to have BOD8.01b
Law does not give much guidance, more custom and case lawStatutory provision open to interpretation8.03Number and election of directorsProfile of someone required to be on BOD
Past history as OfficerPrevious business experience at high level8.02Qualifications of Directors, law mandates none8.05Terms of Directors, expire at 1
stannual meeting
8.20Liberal about how Board does jobMeetings8.21Action without Meeting
Write down resolution of Board and send for everyone to
sign8.11Board may fix compensation8.25Board may create one or more Committees, may do thosethings that Directors as a whole do
c. Officers8.40Board may elect individuals for one or more officers
Assign certain responsibilities8.41Functions of Officers
Similar statutory challenge, despite perceptions, statute gives littleguidance (do things delegated by Board)
d. McQuade v. StonehamS was majority owner of NY GiantsSold shares to M and McGrawminority shareholdersAll were BOD and OfficersEntered into contractnamed directors, officer/positions for each and setsalariesOthers added to BOD, controlled by defendant
Voted to replace plaintiffAlleges did not use best efforts to keep M as treasurer
Contract illegal if precludes BOD from changing officersShareholders elect Directors
BODtrustees of business, hire and monitor officersContract cannot blur roles, Shareholders cannot say who officersare going to be
Contract could saythese people will be Directorse. Villar v. KernanV and K go into business together
V owns 49%, K owns 51% - good thing not 50-50Agreement never get a salary only distributionS comes in for 2%K enters into consulting agreement with company, salaryMcQuade no longer good law
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
14/44
Nuance of statutes say written agreements are enforceable (this was oral)V could sell his sharesbut private corporation, who will buy?
If partnershippartner can dissociate, withdraw and law requirespartner to buy other partner out
V. Shareholder Rightsa.
Section 7.32
Shareholder AgreementsSmall/Private Large/Public
Share RolesShareholderBODOfficer
Observes Hierarchy
Interact Numerous ShareholdersAnonymousPassive
Consensus Competing Interests
Shareholder Agreement No Shareholder Agreements
b. No Shareholder Agreements in large/public companiesAgreement isContract, cannot effectively by done with large number of people andshareholders changing every day
c. Voting Rightsi. Straightseparate election for each set on the BOD
Each shareholder gets to cast her number of shares in anyway she desires for each separate electionMajority shareholder can win out every time
ii. CumulativeDirectors not elected seat-by-seatOne at-large in which the shareholders cast votesTake number of shares you have times the number of
Directors to be elected and can allocate shares any way youwantMajority shareholder cannot control BoardPoint is to prevent majority shareholder from dominating(give minority access to Board)
iii. 7.28Voting for Directors; Cumulative VotingStraight voting is the common practice, cumulative ispermissibleAZwritten in state constitutioncumulative voting isrequired in AZ corporationsbad thing aboutincorporating in AZ
iv.
8.06
Staggered Terms for Directors may be provided by Articlesv. Staggered/Classified9 Directors3 will expire in 2011, 3 in 2013, 3 in 2014EffectMechanism by which management can maintaincontrol changing Board and not displaced by minorityaction, ensure continuity (maintain incumbency)
vi. Super MajoritySection 7.27Greater quorum or Votingrequirements
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
15/44
Act says that corporations controlled by votes, control willbe 50% plus one vote, super majorityany action byshareholders requires 75%
Protects either majority or minority making thedecisions harder or easier
vii.
Preferred StockModified traditional voting rights of shareholders if issuepreferred stock
viii. MBCA7.01Annual Meetingfixed in bylaws
Most are not attended by shareholders, proxy process7.02Special Meetingon call of BOD or if holders of at least10% of votes request meeting
Uncommon7.04Action without Meetingif action is taken by allshareholders to vote on action, signed by all shareholders
Written resolution, if one shareholder is holdout, invalidmeeting7.22Proxyshareholder may vote shares in person or by proxy
Written document in which shareholder makes decisionknown, also a person whom the proxy is given/actingpursuant to ballot
7.07Record Ownerdesignation by a corporation who owns theshares, shareholder is record owner of sharesRecord Datemust be a record owner as of this date to voteStreet Namein large public corporations, records are consideredin street name, not your name
d. Shareholder Proposalsgiving shareholders a legal right to makeproposalsLovenheim v. Iroquois Brandscompany does not want to includeproposal regarding goose treatment in proxy materialsArgumentdoes not concern a significant portion of the companysactions
Exception to SEC Rule: If accounts for less than 5% of businessand is not significantly otherwise related to the business, can keepit out
Court looks at legislative historyotherwise significantlyrelated concerns policy and social issues
If something has ethical or social dimensions, proposal can go forwardIf there is a shareholder proposal and shareholders approve by 75% Boardstill does not have to institute practice (in charge of business decisions)Shareholder proposals are popular but advisory only
But effectgood chance of losing shareholders, Board coming upfor electionshould not ignore shareholder vote
VI. Business Judgment Rule
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
16/44
a. Joy v. Northbankshareholder brought suit; shareholder unhappy bankloaned money to real estate developer/unhappy with lending policyKept loaning more money that was not paid backWhat does it take to breach duty of careBusiness Judgment Ruleentitled to presumption that acted in good faith
Judicially-created concept, not in Statute, varies from state to stateand changes oftenb. Overcoming BJRnegligence is not the standard, must be something
morec. Policy Justifications for BJRbuying stock is voluntary act
Will not second guess decisionshindsight (after-the-fact litigation isimperfect)
Business imperatives call for quick decisions with less than perfectinformation
Potential profit corresponds to potential riskDo not want courts to create overly cautious business decisions
d.
Exceptions to the BJRmore than negligenceStandard must be something like recklessness or gross negligenceDecision lacks a business purpose, tainted by conflict of interest,so egregious as to amount to a no-win decision
VII. Duty of Carea. Breach ofproof to overcome the BJRb. Barnes v. AndrewsA was largest shareholder, asked friend to join BOD
as PresidentReceiver is suing Director for his conduct as director
Line between managing the business and failure of the businessEven though he was a figurehead and did not do this job to the best of hisability, cannot link failure to Director
Never really took active role, did not stay well-engaged, onlylistened to his friend
Causation is the issue herecan look at conduct of directors, assert notengaged but element of proof is proximate causemust show relationshipbetween losses and directors actionsCan breach fiduciary duty but may not have BJR defense becausejudgment was not madeWill have to find proximate cause in breach of duty case
c. Smith v. Van Gorkomshareholders suing BOD in decision to sellcompany for $55 per shareDid not do their duty to investigate that they were getting the best stockprice (only CEO and COO were involved) other Board members did notknow anything except until at the meeting, CEO made presentationFor duty of care case, court looks at process by which decision was made
Courtbreach of duty of care through making uninformeddecisionReasonable reliancehow credible was the person on whom theyrelied?
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
17/44
d. Breach of Duty of Carei. Action/Decision
ii. Inattention (Barnes)iii. Uninformed (Smith)
e. Outgrowth ofSmith Lawsuitwhen directors might be able to be sued forprocess of decisions, increased lawsuits, Delaware legislatureno longera desirability in being a Delaware corporation
i. Passed a statutelimit directors liability duty of care, can bebreached but directors not personally liable for duty of care
ii. MBCA 2.02b4Articles may set forth a provision eliminatingor limiting liability of a directorCovers directors, does not protect officers (statutory immunitydoes not extend to officers)
f. Caremark International Derivative Litigationshareholder derivativeactionalleging failing to supervise employees under Duty of CareOverstating Medicare and Medicaid claimspaid fines to feds
Duty of Carefailure to monitor (Boards inaction causedproblems)Must prove knew or should have known of misconductMust be pervasive and systemic (to show lack of good faithnecessary to show liability)
Hereno liability, settlement sufficientLarge corporations have programs and processed to train employees,supervisory systems, codes of ethics (lawyers design systems)
g. McCall v. ScottColumbia owned and operated 45% of all for-profithospitalsUpcoding, etc. variety of fraudulent practices against MedicarePlaintiffs allege Board knew of different schemes
Failure to monitor, did not have adequate system to ensurecompliance
Certificate of Incorporationadopted immunity provisionbutexceptions for intentional misconduct, breach of duty of loyalty or acts oromissions not in good faith
Reckless may be intentional misconducth. Current CaseIn re Citigroupfailing to adequately protect corporation
from exposure to subprime lending market and CEOs compensationCaremark standardfailure to monitor, knew or should have known therewas systemic risk
Different situation hereknowledge of RISK of business they arein
Must be able to take risks without debilitating feari. In re Walt Disney Companycontract from BOD to replace CEO
Termination dealgolden parachute was the issueShareholders claim breach of duty of care, not acting in good faith
Grossly negligent in decision regarding compensationDefenseBJRgross negligence can overcome rule
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
18/44
Facts to prove not grossly negligentCompensation Committee, hired consultant,approved and taken to BOD for approval
Courtno gross negligenceArgument of not in good faithCharter provision
Delaware court gives standard of liabilityprove intentionaldereliction of duty or conscious disregard of ones responsibilitiesDirectors must be informed, attentive, reasonably supervise and monitorthe business
Can be breached by action or inaction; must have proximate causeIntentional dereliction of duty and conscious disregard for onesresponsibilities to fail good faith
VIII. Duty of Loyaltystandards of conduct and behavior expected is a little moreinstinctive
Duty of Careis there a legal claim for mismanagement of bad conductLoyaltyeasier to understand
a.
Competitioni. Jones Co. v. Frank Burke, Jr.founder made bad decisions, poorremarks; officers wanted to buy him out, negotiations fell through;broke off and started new businessClaimbreach of duty of loyalty by acting inconsistently withtrust, stole clientsCompeting with the Corporation problemthey begancompeting before they had resigned (no breach if they had resignedfirst)Issue of Timingconsideration of starting to compete occurredwhile employed and on the companys time
Approached clientswould have been okay if started owncompany then talked to clients
Duty of loyalty is not implicated if it occurs outside theemployment context
Unless non-compete clause in employment contractallowed by law as long as reasonable
Principleblue lineagrees he will not compete for 3 years inSouthwest, court entitled to BLUE LINE provisions that theywould be enforceable (court can edit1 year in AZ)
ii. Duty of Loyalty regarding competition is found in Agency andapplies to officers and directors, Tortious interference of contract
b. Corporate Opportunitiesi. Northeast Harbor Golf Club v. Harrisusurping of corporate
opportunities (taking advantage of your role in corporation)Officer or director encounters opportunity for corporation; cannotuse it for their own personal interest
Harris was club president, jumped on opportunities to acquire propertiesadjacent to golf course after broker informed her assuming club would beinterested
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
19/44
Trial Courtno usurpation, club lacked financial capability, real estateacquisition was not in line of business of golf club
Expectancy/Interestdid corporation have an interest in the matteror, if not an interest, expectancy?
Subjective, prone to hindsight, what if club would want to
buy it to prevent development?Line of Businessgolf business, not real estateBut it came to her under her title role, not on personal basis
If use financial ability of business as a test, undermining financialability of corporationParty who challenges corporate opportunity has the burden ofproof (shifts to officers and directors to prove it was fair to thecompany)burden not on plaintiff
ii. In re eBay, Inc.- Goldman Sachs was giving preferred stock tooriginal owners to keep them coming back for investment needsGS was underwriter for eBay (help assist in continuing access to
capital, selling stock for corporations for a fee)Took them public, raised more and more money, want tokeep eBay happy
Went to Officers and Directors, reserve themopportunity to buy shares in IPOway to triplemoney rapidlybecame popular and market couldnot buy shares
Line of Business Argumentif Goldman Sachs had brought IPOshares to corporation, corporation would have bought them insteadofficers bought them for their own benefit
eBay has money and buys stock in other companies, if wantto buy this stock, in line of business
Line of business test here, any corporation couldprevail on it
iii. MBCA Sections 8.618.63Where there is an area of law of subjectivity, law will promulgaterulesif abide by, will have prima facie case8.61if there is a director transaction that involves a conflict, adirectors conflicting interest transaction may not be the subject ofequitable relief, or give rise to an award of damages or othersanctions against a director, in a proceeding by a shareholder or byor in the right of the corporation, on the ground that the directorhas an interest in the transaction if
Go to Board and get approval of disinterested directorsGet approval of majority of disinterested shareholders ofcorporationDisinterested Directorperson who has no interest in theoutcome of the decision
Companys best interest is to have a majority ofindependent directors but not a majority of
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
20/44
disinterested directors (party who has no financialinterest in the outcome of a corporate decision)
Safe Harborapproval by majority of disinteresteddirectors, approved by majority of disinterestedshareholders or may accept the burden of proof that it was
otherwise fair to the corporationiv. Section 2.02b4exoneration statute does not protect officers ordirectors for breach of duty of loyalty
c. Conflicts of Interesti. HMG/Courtland Properties v. GrayG and F were directors
HMG bought and sold commercial real estateG negotiated major sale of HMG to NAF; F owned interestin NAF, disclosed his interest but G did not disclose hisinterest
G had financial interest in outcome of offer, confusion about whichinterest he would be preferring
Information he had about real estate he did not disclose toNAF or trying to give NAF lower priceIX. Shareholder Litigation
Eisenberg v. Flying Tiger LinePlaintiff is shareholder for Flying Tiger,created wholly-owned subsidiary, FTC and FTC created FTL
Merger between Flying Tiger and FTLoperated under FTLShareholders given considerationshares in FTC (now own shares inholding company)Eisenberg claims lost vote and influence as shareholderCourt must decide whether Direct or Derivative
a. Directpersonal claim, one in which a shareholder is trying to assert apersonal claim regarding damages to that shareholder (personal loss,personal harm)can be more than one shareholder
Eisenbergs harm theory is his right to vote/shares in thecorporation is right tied to his personal shares, corporationdeprived him of a vote (right or economic interest of shareholder)
i. Van Gorkemdirect, harm to shareholdersb. Derivativewhen interest of corporation is affected, which in turn affects
shareholdersHarm or damage to corporation and therefore shareholder(s) indirectlyShareholders bring claim, derived from corporations harm
To vindicate rights or harms to corporationDefendant inEisenberg argues it is derivativeevaluate case oncorporations interest instead of shareholders interestParticular requirement for derivative suit was Security for Expenses
Deposit financial security for expenses of litigation for defendanti. Disneyderivative, matter complained was breach of duty of care,
misuse of corporate fundsii. Marx v.Akers- shareholders bring derivative lawsuit but any
damages that are paid go to the corporation
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
21/44
MBCA 8.56 and 8.57
8.56Corporation may indemnify and advance expensesunder this subchapter to an officer of the corporation who isa party to a proceeding because he is an officer of thecorporation
8.57Corporation may purchase and maintain insuranceon behalf of an individual who is a director or officerFunding indemnification (insurance fundsindemnity and indemnity funds the officer)
c. Proximate cause can be a problem in bringing a direct lawsuit as ashareholder
Derivative lawsuitlegal theory of recoveryduty of cared. Procedural Requirements
i. Security for Expensesii. Demandmust send demand to directors to initiate a lawsuit
against the corporation (shareholder has directors look at claim and
bring suit to redress)Litigation is in the province of directorsbusiness decisionof whether corporation has been harmed is decision forBoard
Shareholder must show procedure to the courtProblem with Demandshareholders are demanding Board to suethemselves (have personal interest in not pursuing litigation)
Demand can be excusedFutilitynot waste time and money to servedemand and wait for Directors to respond
X. Capitalization for Growtha. Raising Capital
Assume corporation and founders have come to limit of financialresources/end of their appetite to keep using their own money
Look outside corporation for funds (technology, equipment,employees, etc.)Even well-run business does not necessarily have money neededbecause continuing to use it in the business
Options to find money to fund growthDebt, Equity, Retained Earnings
Process with debt or equity is lawyer-driven, count onfinancial people to do math
Debt Equity Preferred
Definition
Characteristics
Borrowed Money
RepaymentReturn - Certain
Contribution by anowner in return forownership interest
No repayment
HYBRIDrights ofpreferred stock iscontractual matter,characteristics of debtand equity
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
22/44
Cash Flow
Restrictions (lenderimposes on borrower)
How loan will be used
What business can beinOther capital
restrictionsMajor expenses or
purch.Default/Remedies
No Ownership
obligationNo fixed/assumedreturnNo cash/no obligationto distribute cash to
youNo Restrictionscannot tell them howto use the money
Will only get whatsleft after everyone elsegets paid
Ownership interest
May have term set atwhich stock will be re-purchased, guaranteedreturn of 8% every
year; also may getnothing back, may beowners (right to electdirectors)
b. Venture CapitalFirst money in corporation comes from founding shareholders,subscribing to initial shares and maybe additional shares
Exhausted willingness or ability to capitalizeGo to Angel Investors
Wealthy individuals, not professional investors but may bewealthy enough that they make personal investments
NextdependsMay be capable of borrowing money/debt
Venture capitalistsfirms/professional investors, collectmoney from wealthy individuals and form partnership,search for ways to invest money
Vehicle for venture capitalists is preferred stockBargain for will loan money but wantdividend, right to sit on BOD for votingpreference, if corp. failspaid first(liquidation)
Initial Public Offeringbecoming public, when VCs get theirmoney back
c. Debt and Equity Financingi. Debt
Has most rights, then preferred then equity/commonIn terms of risk and reward, equity/common has most risk andreward followed by preferred (corporation has right to buy thisback) then debtRights in capital structure are inverse to rewards
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
23/44
Lawyers will be heavily involved in negotiation and drafting ofterms of debt agreements, contractual rights of preferredstockholders and represent common stockholdersWhy borrow money?May not be able to issue more sharesonly source
Multiply return on investment, want to benefit fromprinciple of Leverageby putting a little equity in andborrowing company/leveraging company, enhanced return
ii. EquityWhy would you want to be an Equity Holder?What you get outof it is potentially moremore risks=more potential rewards
Owners stand to gain in a way lenders never would1. Byelick v. VivadelliB owns 10% and V owns 90%Directors, V eliminated shareholders preemptive rights inbylaws (if issue more stock, current stockholders would haveopportunity to buy it)
Preemptive rightswant to hang on to percentage youhave, do not want it diluted, can obtain stock before othershave accessconfer upon existing shareholder the right tosubsequent issuance of shares that will maintain theiroverall percentage ownershipUnder statute6.30 of MBCApreemptive rights are theexception, not the rule, permissive only in corporation thatadopt (in articles of incorporation or bylawsa littleunusual)
Defendants decided to amend bylaws and remove preempted rightsbecause 90% shareholders and on Board of Directorswithintheir rights to do thisPlaintiff argues reduction in percentage was breach of fiduciaryduty to him
Diluted his percentage from 10 to 1%Key was that 30 days later, they issued more sharesto themselves to reduce him to 1%
There would not be a case if they had notdone this
What duty?loyalty (defendants on both sides of transaction)(Court allowed as direct suitridiculous to make a 2-personcorporation make plaintiff bring this as derivative suit withprocedural hurdles)
Virginia law for close corporationscan bring direct suitwhen it would technically be derivativeDo not know answer in AZ, but would probably make youbring a derivative suit
Plaintiff, must show that they breach duty of loyaltyBurden shifts to defendantsmust show they acted fairly
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
24/44
If corporation has preemptive rights, holder must have firstopportunity to buy shares at issuing price
Percentage ownership of other shareholders would not bediluted
Dilution = diminished voting rights
All dilution is not baddifference between ownership andeconomic dilutionown lesser part of company but whatyou own has substantially greater worth
2. Legal Issues for EquityPreemptive RightsDilutionPreferences
d. In capital structure of corporationmay see debt, equity and preferredstock
All will be on balance sheetXI. Going Public
$Company stock Underwriter stock Public (trading) ExchangesIssuerIPO SEC Registration FirmSecondary 33 Act BE 34 ActProfilea. Public Corporations
Will have shares that are obtainable by the pubicCompared to a private company
Larger CapitalizationPrivatedo not have to disclose financials
i. As private company, why would you make decision to go public?1. Access to large amounts of capital (tipping pointexhausted
private contacts they know)2. Owners want to recognize benefits of their work (liquidity)
Opportunity to sell shares and get money in returnAlso important to venture capitalists
3. Also want continuing access to capital4. Status (not so much anymoreprotests and regulation)
ii. Chilling Effects about decision to go publicIf unsuccessful, have not created a lot of wealth could be in troubleVery time-consumingBusiness becomes fully transparent
iii. How it Becomes PublicThrough registration, issues stock to underwriter which payscapital to company in consideration for sharesUnderwriter becomes intermediary and puts stock in hands of thepublic in turn for paying for the sharesPublic become ultimate owners of the sharesMoney/Capital goes to company to finance it
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
25/44
First time that a private company is the IPOinitial public offer(selling stock)
After that, make secondary offersiv. SEC Registrationgoverned by two federal laws
1. Securities Exchange Act of 1933What must companies do to become publiccompaniesSEC is regulatorUnless registration statement is in effect, unlawfulfor personal to make use of interstate commerce tosell securitiesMake reasonable investor knowledgeable about thestockregistration provisionProvisions regarded as self-executing
Law has accomplished goal if requiresdisclosuresjust regulatory review of
disclosures, whether they are there and if so,can go public2. Securities and Exchange Act of 1934
Now public, laws and regulations governing yourbehavior
Corporate Securities lawyers run process in terms of dealing withcompanies, represent underwriters
Manage registration processRegistration Statement, filed with SECApproved by SEC, go to underwriters (investment banks)
Advise companiesTradingPublic OffersDetermine Number of Shares and at what price, distributethrough Network of Brokers
Once public, subject to 1934 ActConsequences for not making proper disclosure inregistration statement is extensive
SEC and individuals in stock market can bringaction
Must on continuous basis make complete disclosure to thepublic regarding aspects of the business
Form 10-Qfiled with SEC at conclusion of eachfinancial quarter, discloses to public what positionisAnnual Basismust file 10-Kmore extensivedisclosure, results of financial audit, financialposition, new risk factors
b. Public Offerings and Private Exemptionsi. Doran v. Petroleum Management Corp.
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
26/44
Federal Lawevery security must be registeredUnlawful to sell stock unless registration statement is filedwith SEC
Unless can find exemption in federal lawExemptions
1.
USC 4(1)do not need registration statement2. USC 4(2)transaction by offerorBurden on Company to prove transaction by issuernot involving public offering
When does it become a public offering?For exemptions, must know number of investors,relationship to each other, offeror, number of units, size andmanner of offering
SECRegulation DRegulation under 33 Act, Private Offering ExemptionGives some certainty
1. 35 investors or less2. Access to information (can show investors had sameinformation they would have had if was registered)3. Manner of offering (no general solicitation)knowinvestors, referred to them, networked to them (websitessolicitation)4. Resale limitationdoing a private placement, buyermust agree not to resell investment for a period of time(holding period is usually 2 years)SAFE HARBORPublic Policyto make sure that investors know what theyare getting themselves into if there is a small number ofinvestors and no need of federal protection
c. Investment ContractsChallenge of Registration, Exemption
Law keeps making reference to securitySecurityany stock, note, bond, venture, evidence ofindebtedness, etc. (an interest)
Trap in definitioninvestment contractSEC v. Howeycitrus farmer, did not havefinancial capability to conduct operation;give people who help share of profits; SECinvolvedplaintiffs were soldsecurity/investment and entitled toprotection of federal law under securitieslaw (sold them investment contract)
Investment Contractinvestment of money in a common enterprise withexpectation of profit solely from the efforts of others
The Howey Test (4 factors)
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
27/44
No limit to imagination of what can be investmentcontracts
Key Element of Proofsolely from efforts of othersd. Section 5 of Securities Exchange Actunlawful to sell securities by
means of interstate commerce without registration
Every time sell Securities, must register them unless ExemptionXII. Making MoneySize of company, complexity, capitalization, private or public make a bigdifference in terms of distribution of capitala. Compensation
i. Hollis v. HillHill argues Hollis being paid too much, stoppedpaying his salary, shut down his officer, stopped sending financialreports
Hollis sued, wanted Hill to buy him out, oppressive actsCase introduces new concept of fiduciary dutyduty of majorityshareholder to minority shareholder to minority shareholder and
majority shareholder engaging in oppressive actsbreach offiduciary dutyHill could have argued financial issuescorporate restructureCould have avoided mess with forming partnershipentitled to bebought out, easier to exit or corporation with shareholdersagreement
ii. Exacto SpringsIRS thought principal owner , Heitz, was beingpaid too muchShareholders do not objectIRSwhat was taken as compensation should have been taken asdividend (taxed differently)deduction for corporation vs. taxedtwiceC-Corp.pass-through, would not have dispute is S. Corp.
iii. Giannotti v. Hamwayminority vs. majority shareholdersPlaintiffsdefendants authorizing excessive compensation forofficers (selves)
Argue liquidityWant dividendscorporation is doing well but theyare not reaping the economic benefits
BOD decides who should be paid and how muchBreach of Duty of CareBJR
No showing that there was a disinterested BoardNo Breach of Duty of CareBreach of Duty of Loyalty (on bothsides of transaction)
Burden goes to BODargue behaved fairlyCourts can fashion remedy at discretion
Orders liquidationextremekilling the golden gooseb. Dividendstransfer of money from corporation to shareholder if made a
profiti. MBCA 1.40(6)
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
28/44
Distributionbroadly aimed categoryIncludes dividends
ii. Total pool of dividends paid pro rate to shareholders equivalent topercentage of their ownership
iii. Dodge v. FordDodge brothers suing Fordinstead of payingdividends, will reinvest in the companyDividend policyat end of the year, retained earnings
would pay substantial dividend based on profitDodge brothers wanted money for own companyCorporations can use business judgment whether to pay dividends
Policy decisionencourage investmentNo dividendsreinvest in company
Most corporations do not pay dividendssmaller companymorelikely to see in order to provide liquidity for shareholdersCan compel to pay dividendsbreach of duty of care
Ford not exercising duty of care that shareholders can profit
Shareholders rarely ever succeed with thisiv. Zidell v. Zidellbrothers, minority and majority shareholdersMinority argued failed to pay dividend, left company after disputeand wanted dividendJurisdiction does not recognize oppressionWeaknessleft company then wanted dividendMajority viewpaying dividends is within business judgment
Must show intense hostility of controlling faction,extraordinarily high compensation and desire to push outminority shareholder
Company can find good faith reason with legitimate businesspurposewill not be compelled to pay dividend
Company justified no dividends, court will not secondguess
v. Creditors have great interest in whether dividends paidCannot pay dividend if makes you insolventMBCA 6.40
Cannot pay dividends if would not be able to paydebts as they become dueInsolvency Test
Cannot pay dividends if total assets would be less than totalliabilitiesBalance Sheet Test
Only restriction on paying dividends is related to protection ofcreditors measured by Insolvency or Balance Sheet Tests
vi. MBCA 8.33Directors Liability for Unlawful DistributionsDirectors who approve dividend or distribution that violates one ofthe two tests are held personally liable
vii. MBCA 2.02(4)protection of monetary damages, directors do nothave to personally pay damages for lawsuits against company
Exception is 8.33
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
29/44
viii. Why have cumulative dividend featurepreferred stockholderbargained for preferred dividend and corporation does not havelegal source of funds
Violation of insolvency test if paid that yearix. Two Other Types of Distribution
1.
Repurchasecorporation makes repurchasediscretionary, decision to repurchase sharesTo increase share price/stock value
Repurchase from common stockholdersthrough buying in the open market
2. Redemptionwhat occurs when corporation buys backstock from stockholders
Also a feature of preferred stockCommon stock does not have this right
c. Selling Stocki. In Private Corporation
Decision by Shareholderwant value of work they put inCan sell all stock to new buyer (sold company)Can sell some stock to obtain capital
ii. Impediments1. Finding a Buyer for less than majority interest (liquidity
and minority rights)2. Valuation
In public companyeasy to value and sell shares(stock exchange value)
What shares are worth is based oninformation
1. Financial Statements filed with SEC2. Guidancecommunicating to
public, suspect what will come tobenefit in next quarters(to beintroduced, foreseeable problems)
3. Analystsworking for investmentbanks, trained to make informedjudgments of value of stock
4. Correlators/Comps5. Price Trends6. Media7. Brokerssimilar to analysts, get tips
iii. Securities Act of 1934where 8-K, 10-K and 10-Q comes fromIf public company, obligations regarding information
Section 16insiders of companySection 14mergers and acquisitions, proxiesSection 10anti-fraud provision (Vast)
iv. Fraud and Misrepresentation
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
30/44
1. Basic, Inc. v. Levinsonpublic company, manufacturedsteel
Combustioninterested in acquiring BasicPeople sold stock, not knowing about merger(companies had discussions)
Issuepublic statementsdirectly influencedecisions; claim directors made false statements thatviolated 10b10b-5monster of all securities regulations; it shallbe unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, bythe use of any means or instrumentality of interstatecommerce, or of the mails or of any facility ofnational securities exchange to make any untruestatement of a material fact or to omit to state amaterial fact necessary in order to make thestatements made, not misleadingin connection
with the purchase or sale of any securityOnly applies to securities regulationViolationin discussion for company to besold; statements contradicted what wasgoing on; false statement/omissionsoldstock on this basis
2. Dupuy v. DupuyM and C own company with motherOne brother selling stock to other; fraud claimmisrepresented and concealed factsCan you use 10b-5 with respect to intrastate phone calls
If meet jurisdictional requirement10b-5 appliesIs phone instrumentality of state commerce?
Courtquestion of congressionalintentyes
Cannot think of circumstance where 10b-5 would not applyApplying to all purchases and sales of securities
All transactions of private and publiccompanies, individuals selling securities
3. Purpose for 10b-5Efficient Market Theoryif allinformation is in the market, individuals can makeinformed decisions
4. Elements for 10b-5a. Standingb. Jurisdiction (Dupuy)c. Act - misrepresentation or omissiond. Materialityif there is a substantial likelihood a
reasonable investor would find the fact important inbuying or selling securities
e. Scienteralso use in false claims actmust intendthat statement you make will mislead OR that you
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
31/44
know the statement you are making would tend todeceive
f. Relianceplus causation (plaintiffs must hear info,rely on it and cause them to do something)
Can apply Fraud in the Marketplace
material was out there regardless if read itg. In connection with purchase or sale of stockh. Damages
5. Issues of Full transparencya. Competitive product will be copiedb. Could be prematurec. Could be misleading, misconstruedd. Quality of information goes down (no judgment
regarding materiality)Lawyersbalance is x (in middle between no info and allinfo)
Dilemma addressed with Private SecuritiesLitigation Reform Act (PSLRA)Encourage companies to put info out thereand provide protection for so doing (frombeing sued)
6. EP Medsystems, Inc. v. EchocathMed claims E mademisrepresentations regarding imminent contractsAgreement to buy shares of Es preferred stock(privateoffering exemption)Elements of 10b-5 provenEs defense while E made representations orally,significant amount of available information to M thatinvestment was risky
Taking advantage of SAFE HARBOR underPSLRA
People read information and cannot sue youif things turn out differently
Problem is oral representations made right beforeinvestment decision, directors to directors
Present statements of imminent facts, person toperson (as opposed to good faith projections offuture eventswhat PSLRA applies to)
XIII. Securities Regulationa. Insider Trading
i. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co. Defendants are insiders of TGSstarted buying land in area butkept land test a secretsilence, no statements/misrepresentations
Bought stock to make profit once information went publicTook advantage, made personal profit
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
32/44
*If in possession of material, non-public information, must eitherdisclose or abstain from trading in that security10b-5no face-to-face deception but missed out on potentialprofits
May be difficult argument to make for fraudeasier to
argue FAIRNESS for the market (preserve integrity ofmarketplace)ii. Could have proper business purpose for secrets
Yes, no requirements to disclose all information (entitled tokeep information secret as long as proper)
iii. Chiarella v. USANYONE in possession of material insideinformation?Chiarella works for printerfinds sensitive financial documents
Agent to Buyer companyPurchased stock without disclosing his knowledge
Conviction overturnedinsider tradingthose who must be
punished must be breaching some sort of fiduciary relationshipWithout fiduciary nexus, there is no duty/liabilityCould be considered fiduciary for buyer but boughtstock in target
iv. United States v. OHaganfirm hired to structure Pillsbury buy-out dealworked at firm and heard about itRepresented buyer, bought stock in Pillsbury
Chiarella still good law, took different routeMisappropriation TheoryDuty to the source, if you are in aposition where you would expect confidential information to comeinto your possession and source would reasonably expect you tokeep it in confidence, that is establishment of relationship, may nottake info for own benefit
v. Can create insider in one of two waysClassic Fiduciary,Misappropriation
vi. Dirks v. SECCame into possession of information that EquityFunding was operating massive fraud
SECDirks in possession of material non-publicinformation
Objection to him discussing it with clientsTipping
InsiderSecrist (told Dirks about issues)TipperDirks, told clientsTippeeClients of Dirks buying and sellingstocks (can become Tippers if shareinformation)
Problem with SECs framing of insider trading (tests)1. To have insider information, must originate with insider
(Secristformer employee, not status of insider)2. Liability occurs only if there is a trade
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
33/44
3. Tipper must expect getting something of value in return fortipping to be liable
XIV. Selling Controla. Protecting Minority Shareholders
i. Perlman v. Feldmansteel company, F was president andmajority shareholder; W bought Feldmans sharesMinority shareholders upset; W paid more than shares worth (theycould not sell shares at same price)1st PrincipleControl Premiumshares held by majorityshareholder are probably worth more than minority because theyare control shares
W bought majority interest at control premiumMinority argues buying valuable asset (breachedduty of loyaltydisguised sale of asset)
Corporate OpportunityNot a good case
ii.
Frandsen v. Jensen-Sundquistif majority wanted to sell shares,offer first to minorityF is minority shareholder in JProvisionif at any time, majority wanted to sell shares, minorityshould get right of first offer (ROFRright of first refusal)
Normal provisionReciprocalif I do not exercise my ROFR, agree to buy my sharesat price selling to 3
rdparty
If sell majority interest to new shareholder, I get to goalong (less common)
Within power of J and Board to sell bank/assetNever offer to break shareholder agreementnot sellingcorporate control, no question of breach of fiduciary duty(contract case)
Illustrates use of shareholder agreements and how they will affectsale of shares by majority shareholders (particularly sale of controlof company)
MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS
Uber-sale of Stocksale of all stock of corporationessentially the sale of the company1. Corporations that fail can come in form of liquidation and dissolution
Shareholders can apply to court to dissolve corporation and liquidate assets(judicial dissolution)Corporation has not succeeded, shareholders can vote to cease operations, marshalassets, liquidate and hand out assets and dissolve corporation
2. Corporation is a success, sell itSmall corporationsell for liquidity, personal decisionGetting larger, more complex, need more capitalgo public, sell corporationMotivation of buyerbuying competitor, technology/IP, want to grow
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
34/44
Mergers and Acquisitions/Asset PurchaseHave very different legal consequences
Each designed and structured in different way, set of different rules butoutcome will be same
I. Mergerspecific legal structurea.
HMO-W v. SSM Health CareHMO shareholders were minority shareholders; SSM is plaintiffShareholderDiscussion between HMO and Unitedmerger (Unitedsurvivingcorporation, HMO is disappearing); Buyer is United (Acquiring) andHMO is Seller (Target)Disputevaluation of HMO, State law for dissenting shareholders
Minority shareholder can object properly to valuation being paid,can demand appraisal/ex part courtspecial proceeding forvaluation
Dissenters Appraisal Rights
MBCA 13.02
Right to Appraisal, Cannot mess up steps or case will bethrown outDissenters Rights not frequently argued
Complex, lawyers, experts to value (costly strategy)Board of companies put a lot of thinking in terms ofvaluation because avoiding lawsuit of breach of duty ofcare
Gamble in appraisalHMO did not make material misrepresentations toshareholders(b) allow shareholders to merger to always complain except whencorporation is a public corporation (obvious what value is worth)
b. Characteristicsi. Shareholders of Target have more money in their pocket at the end,
rights are overii. MBCA 11.02one or more domestic business corporations may
merge with one or more domestic or foreign corporations(c) Plan for mergerlegal contract that sets out terms of merger
Principlemost important debatewhat is the value to bepaid for shares
iii. Once determine valuation, for every share you tender, we will giveyou $x
Can pay consideration in to shareholders in cash, property,debt or shares (can split between them)Called the straight merger
iv. Parent corporation will be acquireridentifies selling/targetcorporation
Creates subsidiary, plan of mergertarget merges withsubsidiary and parent pays considerationTarget disappears
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
35/44
Called triangular mergersame result as straightmerger1. Triangular MergerParent, Target and
SubsidiaryLawyers frequently structure mergers this way
Shareholders tender shares to subsidiary(target disappears)Protecting parent corporationcan go aftersubsidiary but not parent
Addresses biggest concernsucceeding unknown liabilities,mitigates risk of liabilitiesLiabilities vest with subsidiary, notparent, subsidiary acquires liabilitiesand parent is not on the hook
c. MBCA 11.04Proceduresi.
Plan of merger must be adopted by BODii. After adopting, BOD must submit plan to shareholders forapproval
iii. Plan of merger requires majority of shareholders to consentShareholders vote is required for fundamental decisions
Merger includedrights as a shareholder couldpotentially disappear with corporationCan also vote on dissolution and acquisition (inaddition to changes in Articles of Incorporation)
d. File Articles of Mergerlegal public filing, A has acquired T,shareholders have been paid and continue as A
e. Legal Effect of MergerMBCA 11.07Merger becomes effective, surviving corporation continuesSeparate existence of other corporations ceasesAll property owned by and contract right possessed by T is vested into AAll liabilities of T are vested in A
All assets, contracts and rights of T become those of A; also ALLliabilities (scary for lawyers)known and unknown
Liabilities could include Tort Claims, Contract Disputes,Employment Discrimination, Environmental and DebtAll assets include Property, Equipment, Customers(contractsmay not go with A), Employees (if notterminated), Contracts, Accounts Payable, AccountsReceivable, Supply Relationships
Survivor/Buyer Target/Seller Target Shareholders
New AssetsNew Liabilities
Disappears If merger approved, getcash or shares of survivor
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
36/44
New Shareholders (maybe-Consideration paid was
shares, not cash)When faced with prospectof merger, could vote itdown, dissent/appraisalrights, can sue (duty of care
by their BOD or loyaltyboth sides of transaction)
f. Weinberger v. UOPSignal decided to purchase majority stake in UOP,acquisition50.5%; Weinberger with public owned restWeinberger sues Directors, unhappy with purchase price
Public companyno seeking of appraisalClaimin decision of BOD to approve merger and making businessdecisionviolation of duty of care (protected by BJR)
Recast as duty of loyaltyconflict of interestOn both sides of dealvoted on own proposal (BOD owes
duty to shareholdersthemselves and minority)BJR is no defenseplaintiff has burden to proveentire fairness
g. Shareholders of Target Corporationi. Rights and Remedies
1. Opportunity to Voteif passes by majority, merger willoccur and will be paid (even if you vote no, unless Dissent)
2. Dissenters Right/Appraisal Right avoid minority holdingmerger hostage
3. Lawsuit against BoardULP caseDuty of Loyalty or Duty of Care (but BJR)
h.
Making a Tender Offeracquiring corporation communicates directly toshareholders (Tendered for majority, if do not get majority, will nothappen)
i. Why make tender offer?Could get merger accomplished quickly, avoiding negotiations ofwhat company is worth
II. Acquisition/Purchase or Sale of Assetsa. Franklin v. USXmesothelioma case
Mother was employee of WPS, Con Cal purchased WPS assets and agreedto assume liabilitiesCon Cal sold assets to Con DelCon Del merged into USXPlaintiff argues USX should be responsible
Argues mergerassumed liabilities, known and unknownCourtWPS did not merge with USX, could only have sued Con Cal
If hold USX responsible, would destroy asset purchase concept
b. Characteristics
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
37/44
Have same outcome in asset purchase as in merger but structure, legalconsequences and legal operation are very different
i. Buyer, Sellerii. Buyer purchases assets only
iii. Consideration/$ goes to Seller who decides what to do with themoney (shareholders have no decision, no control over assets)Total amountnot per share
iv. MBCA 12.01No approval of shareholders of corporation isrequired to sellany or all assets in usual and regular course ofbusiness
v. MBCA 12.02requires approval of shareholders if dispositionwould leave corporation without significant continuing businessactivity (essentially selling company)
vi. MBCA 13.02(a)(3)shareholders entitled to vote in sale of all orsubstantially all assets; can dissent (divide interestif separategroup, what would shareholders have received?)
vii.
MBCA 11.07buyer succeeds to assets and seller continuesviii. Transaction does move liabilities to buyerc. Assets
Land (deed), Trucks (title), Leased Office Space (landlordapproval), Contracts (assign and assumptionbuyer will assume ifassigned to them), Property with Mortgage (Release), Employees(Seller fires then buyer hires), Technology/IP (patent, assumelicense), Name of Seller (agreement, seller must change name withACC)
i. All of this must be done before asset purchase can beconsummated
1. Pay off creditors, banks, satisfy mortgageUCC releasesliens
d. LiabilitiesBank Loan (paid out of proceeds of sale), Real Estate Mortgaged(need seller to consent with lender, agree for buyer to take onmortgage), Payables/Amount owed to Creditors (maintainrelationships with suppliersbuyers assumes payables),Unknowns (buyer disclaims assumption of other liabilities)
e. Mergerassets are automatically transferred, can avoid legal work ofasset purchase; liabilities taken on by survivor
Also, asset purchase easier with small company; big/multi-nationalpublic companymust hire lawyers in each state land is in, patentsare in, etc.
f. Aware of sellers environmental implications unknown liabilityAsk for Indemnificationif buyer is sued in connection withunassumed liability and lose, seller will pay (seller usually agreesto time or money limit)only as good as indemnifior
g. After purchase consummated, what are sellers optionsi. Could reinvest/continue
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
38/44
ii. Dissolvecash stock goes to shareholders after pay creditorsAsset Sale Merger
Assets Negotiated All
Liabilities Negotiated All
Consents Yes No
Liens Must be Released NoWhich is Easiest - Depends
III. Stock Purchasea. Buyer wants to own selling corporationcan buy stock
Buyer asks shareholder to purchase their stock (if sell, buyer ownscorporation)
b. Legal consequences more like a merger (buying all stock)noenumeration or transfer of assets; take all liabilities
c. Why not do this all the time?A lot of shareholderssome may not be willing
For merger, just need 50% plus 1IV. S-Corporations
a. Difference with C-Corp. is taxationpass-through with Sb. All pertains to S-Corp. except when business is formed
i. Articles filed, may elect to be taxed as pass-throughc. Differences
i. Can have only one class of stockii. Must have fewer than 100 shareholders
iii. Shareholders must be US citizensiv. Shareholders must be natural persons
Suggest must be small domestic companytax benefit
d. Fewer and fewer S-Corpse. Desirable featureslimited liability and pass-throughLIMITED PARTNERSHIPS
I. Like S-Corp.declining in use; benefits of limited liability and pass-throughII. Characteristics
a. Ownership1 or moreb. Managementin the general partner; limited partners are there for
investors/pass-throughc. Liabilitiesgeneral partner has all liabilities as joint and several with
other general partnersLimited Partners have no liability for business or general partners,no personal liability (passive investors)
d. Taxationpass-throughe. Transferability/FormalityStatutecannot inadvertently form a limited
partnership, must file certificate with Secretary of State in AZIII. Limited Partnerships are governed by the Uniform Limited Partnership Act,
AZ adopted
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
39/44
Zeiger v. Wilfplaintiff did not receive consultant fee; Wilf is defendant, offered topurchase property from Z, consultant fee part of purchase price
Formed corporation to limit liability; W has a GP (general partnership formed fortax reasons)Z and Trenton formed limited partnership for assets (capitalize with passive
investors)Among limited partners is Wilfs GPTrenton and LP filed for bankruptcy, Z looks to collect from W (only one leftstanding)
Argued officer in corporation, assumed control over LP=assumed personalliability
Lawin LP, limited partners cannot have limited liability unless act like generalpartners
Court sides with Wrunning business as corporation would if still solventProtected by corporate shield as agent
Pursue another theory for Z
Fiduciary duty to Z as limited partner (general partner to limited partner)Corporation and limited partnership operated informallypierce corporateveil
Failed to follow corporate formalitiesgo after shareholderpersonally
IV. Reasonable Reliancewhat do entities believe regarding who isresponsible/liable?
Relevant but not dispositiveV. Why would someone be a general partner in a limited partnership?
a. Opportunity to run business, execute ideas and use other peoples moneyControl
b. Feesfor managing partnershipc. Way profits of business are divided up
4 limited partnerseach get 25% of profits until receive moneyback, then general partner will get 20% of fees and limited partnersare reduced to 20% each
Ability to change economics of businessVI. When limited partnerships are used
a. For establishing, financing and running business with specific purpose andspecific end date (real estate development)
b. Limited partnerships are very project-discrete = single purposeCommon with hedge funds
Frigidaire v. Union PropertiesF gets contract with Commercial, limited partnershipUnion is general partner, Mannon and Baxter are ownersF argues Commercial breached contract, individuals have all money
Trying to get Mannon and Baxter to payargues asserted controlDefenseacting as directors of Union
Formed as GP to limit liabilityCourtmere fact company undercapitalized does not mean it cannot function asrole in limited partnershipF should have argued piercing corporate veil
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
40/44
Mere instrumentalitynot following formalitiesBest shot would have been Undercapitalization
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES
I. Uniform LLC Acta. Effort like RUPA and MBCA to bring uniformity among states but leastadopted of the Uniform Acts
b. StatuteLLC intentionally looks like a corporation and a generalpartnership (MBCA and RUPA)
c. Specific SectionsSection 101 (10)
(11)
(12)
If form LLC, designate whether manager-managed ormember-managed; default will be member-managed
Section 201
LLC is legal entity distinct from membersSection 202OrganizationFiled with ACCSection 203Articles of Organization112
404- Management of LLC (like RUPA)making managementdecisions by majority vote
Members share equally in managementPart bin manager-managedvest in manager all powerto conduct business
405
406Limitations on Distributionsmade when members
determine according to percentage interest; distribution may not bemade if(solvency test)303Liability of Members and Managers (most litigated,probably); not liable for debt, obligation, or liability of thecompany solely by reason of being or acting as a member ormanager
(b)failure to follow formalities is not ground forimposing personal liability on members or managersIn corporation, corporate veil is common lawLLCdiscussing piercing in statute (defensedrafters didnot want members to be personally liable)
But what about undercapitalization?if defending amember, problem with b is it only mentions one groundsfor being unable to pierce the veil (not a lot of clarity)
409General Standards of Members and Managers Conduct(a)only fiduciary duties member owes are duty of loyalty
and care, (b) and (c) are limitations103All members may enter into operating agreement; actgoverns relations unless operating agreement provides (sounds like
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
41/44
RUPApeople can form business and run it any way they want aslong as have agreement)LLCscode is default
Operating Agreements will be final word on a lot ofcomplex issues
Not a lot of case law for LLCsnew and largely a
matter of contract law (contract is litigated, not thecorporate law)*Pitfall for LLCa lot of LLCs form by printing pre-printed forms off the internet, people have no concept ofwhat they signed up for(b)if have operating agreement, cannot eliminate duty ofloyalty but can have areas that do not as long as notmanifestly unreasonableCannot unreasonably reduce duty of care or eliminate goodfaithas long as not manifestly unreasonable
Can contract out of duty of care and of loyalty as
long as not being manifestly unreasonable301Agency of Members and Managerssounds likepartnerships, each member is an agent and can bind the businessunless had no authority and person they were dealing with hadnotice they did not have authority
Binds company only is authorized by other members-Apparent Authority (a)1, 2Part bIn manager-managed companymember isnot an agent of the company
II. LLCfastest growing form of business organizationa. Is becoming or is most popular form in USb. Idea to be as flexible as possiblec. Case law is almost non-existent and Code is vague
III. Characteristicsa. Ownership1 or moreb. ManagementCan be manager-managed (organized such that there is a
manager and owners are passive)like corporations; can be member-managed (nomenclature given to owners of LLCs is members in statute)like general partnership
c. Liabilitieslimitedd. Taxpass-through or double (depends if more favorable to be taxed as
partnership or as corporation)can elect tax treatment at tax time everyyear
e. Transferability/Formalitiesmust be legally formed like corporation;transferability is more problematicevidence ownership by percentagemembership interest
IV. Lawsuitsagency and piercing the veila. Westec v. LanhamLanham and Clark formed PII (an LLC); Clark got
business from Westec, contract never signed; Westec never paid and
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
42/44
argued Lanham and Clark never disclosed PII on business card was anLLCDefendants claimed not personally liable because LLCDistrict CourtClark is not liable because he was acting as agent forLanham and the business
Case is more an agency law casedisclosed and undisclosed principalIn agency relationship, principal is liable on contract, not the agentLaw of undisclosed principaldoes not disclose he is an agent,law of agency says agent is liable on the contractPartially-disclosed Principaldoes not identify principalspecifically, Courts less consistent heresome say agent is liableothers say agent is only partially liable
CourtNot much value to raise idea of LLC because it was not identified;partially-disclosed he was working for Lanham but not thebusiness/PII
Defendants try to argue constructive notice since filed as LLCCourt says NoStatute requires them to use LLC as part of the company name when theyfile as an LLC
Gives notice to third partiesb. Webber v. US Sterling SecuritiesRetail Relief LLC, Orrs are members
of LLCSend unsolicited fax advertisement to Webber, violation of federal lawOrrs argued limited liabilityApplying Delaware lawwhere LLC was established
Not about solely being members of LLC, it is about theirindividual acts
Characterization as personal, not business, conductMay be a great argument in LLC or corporation
c. Kaycee Landtrying to pierce the veilDefendantstatuteno personal liability for membersWyoming Courtcannot presume legislature intended to abdicatecommon law principles
Under Wyoming law, LLCs and members subject to losing protectionof limited liability
Not going to try to make any laws, thoughArgument of policy to the courtNot very helpful
d. In Re Suhadolnikattempt to argue piercing is barred under allcircumstances, including fraudCourtIn Illinois, piercing availablealter ego, fraud, etc.
Recognizing corporate piercing for LLCsV. Arizona
a. Allowing to pierce the corporate veil for LLCs has not been decided
-
7/30/2019 Biz Orgs Outline Fall 2011 (Forst) (1)
43/44
b. Does not contain a provision similar to 409no list of fiduciary duties ofLLCs
i. Also does not have provision discussing operating agreements thatsays cannot eliminate but can modify rights
1. Neither imposes fiduciary duties nor negotiate or eliminatethemVI. Problems
a. Piercing corporate veilDoes law give right to pierce LLC veil
b. Fiduciary DutiesDuty of Care and of LoyaltyBut operating agreement allows to limit and negotiate fiduciaryduties
c. AZ does not have provision that establishes fiduciary dutiesArgue fiduciary duties embedded in common law/case law (whoknows)
Operating agreement can include provisions not conflicting withlawMaybe can say eliminate all fiduciary duties
Bottom Linewe do not knowVII. ULLCA
501Members Distributional InterestMember has distributional interest but no provision that it must bedescribed or their rights (statute is silent regarding more than one class,preferred class, etc.)
Presume meant to be flexiblecould create classes of membershipinterest
Represented by Certificatesuggest use shares502Transfer of Distributional Interest
Can transfer shares but just get economic rights in business503transferee may become member of LLC if transfers rights in accordancewith operating agreement (like partnership)504rights of creditor; very consistent with partnership law; creditor canattach economic interest in LLC but does not become member with all ofmembers rights601, 602 and 603parallels partnership law; owner in LLC can withdraw,rightfully or wrongfully but cannot prohibit from withdrawing
At-will LLCsoperating agreement does not exist or is silentcan bebrought outOtherwise, Paid out when everyone else is paid at termination of company
700s and early 800sdissolution, withdrawals805terminating LLC