FACULTYTALK Archives

July 2014

FACULTYTALK@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Michael O'Hara <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
Date:
Fri, 4 Jul 2014 13:54:05 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (40 lines)
ALSBTALK:

In what faith to raise the subsidiaries?  OK, fine laugh.  But, all good jokes must contain truth not yet seen.

First, assume a USA State that permits a for-profit corporation with a single shareholder, single director, and single officer to engage in any lawful purpose.  

Second, assume that State of incorporation and headquarters has a distinctive preference with respect to religion.  

Third, assume a single human is that sole shareholder, sole director, and sole office.  

Fourth, assume that human publicly professes hewing devotedly to that distinctive preference with respect to religion, and known behaviors of that human are fully consistent with that distinctive preference.  In doing so the closely held corporation is run with sufficient profit to sustain and prosper the family, including to educate that sole shareholder/director/officer's three children at the best schools.

Alas, all humans are mortals while many corporations are perpetual; and, disappointment with the choices of one's children is a routine burden of parenthood.  

Fifth, assume the human's three children inherit equal percentages of the corporation's shares.

Sixth, assume child #A is the parent's darling because she both hews to the religion of the parent and resides in the same State as the deceased; assume child #B is the antithesis of the parent because he very publicly repudiated and attacked the religion generally and a distinctive core practice specifically and now resides in an officially atheist foreign jurisdiction; and assume child #C is a profit focused MBA from your own jurisdiction.
 
Seventh, assume #B and #C vote their shares to elect #B as the sole Director; whereupon #B appoints #C as the sole officer with the unambiguous written instruction to pursue profit at every turn so as to throw off enough cash that #B can spend at least oodles on maligning #A's religion and practices as part of the corporation's branding.

For what cause of action does #A have standing to sue?

Michael

Professor  Michael  J.  O'Hara, J.D., Ph.D.    
Mammel Hall 228                                                           
Finance, Banking, and Real Estate Department               
College of Business Administration 
University of Nebraska at Omaha 
6708 Pine Street  
Omaha  NE  68182 
http://cba2.unomaha.edu/faculty/mohara/web/ohara.htm 
402_554_2823  voice    fax  402_554_2680 (not private) 
[log in to unmask] 
 
Co-Editor, The Earnings Analyst
www.A-R-E-A.org  
Book Review Editor, Economics & Business Journal  
http://ecedweb.unomaha.edu/neba/journal/home.htm 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2