LP6.2 Lien v. Lien Essay

A. What type of business entity did Pete short temper & Sons, Inc. , operate when it was before founded in 1944?. Pete Lien & Sons, Inc. operated a partnership when the business was originally founded in 1944. B. Who were the original three partners of Pete Lien & Sons, Inc. , when it was founded? The original partners were Bruce Lien, his br some other Charles Lien, and their father Pete Lien Sr. C. When Pete Lien & Sons, Inc. , incorporated in 1952, the partners became ___________ of the stack.When Pete Lien & Sons, Inc. , in 1952, the partners became live sh atomic number 18holders of the corporation. D. How many people served on the corporations board of directors at the time of the lawsuit? At the time of the lawsuit, seven people served on the corporations board of directors. E. At the time of the litigation, who owned the bulk of stock in the corporation and received more income and dividends than any other shareholder?Bruce Lien owned the majority of stock in the corporat ion and received more income and dividend than the other shareholders. F. What allegations did Bruce Lien assert his complaint in the civil action that he brought against the corporation and the other members of the board of directors in April 2000? Bruce Lien alleged minority shareholder oppression, breach of fiduciary tariff and tortuous interference with prospective business relations or expectancy. G. down the stairs what South Dakota statute did the trial tribunal find that there was a shareholder deadlock in failing to chosen directors? (example (SDCL __-__-__) Under SDCL 47-7-34(3) That the shareholders are deadlocked in voting power, and have failed, for a period which include at least two consecutive annual meeting dates, to elect successors to directors whose terms have expired or would have expired upon the preference of their successors H. What did the trial court determine to be the most upright port of breaking the deadlock?The trial court determined the most equ itable manner of breaking the deadlock was a blind auction amid Bruce and all the other shareholders for the sale of the corporation. I. When the trial courts closing was appealed, did the South Dakota Supreme judgeship, agree that a deadlock existed? No, the Supreme Court did not agree a deadlock existed and reversed the trial courts rulings. The Supreme Court stated, there was no showing that the shareholders were deadlocked in voting power because of Bruces refusal to attend the meeting and get into in the voting for new directors.