The Dangers of Anti-Reliance, Integration, and General Release Provisions in Sales of StockBy Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, May 2023In Walworth Investments-LG, LLC v. Mu Sigma, Inc., the Illinois Supreme Court issued an opinion that emphasizes the need for any attorney representing a shareholder selling stock to the corporation or a controlling shareholder to exercise due diligence in determining the basis for the shareholder’s decision to sell and in drafting or reviewing the sales agreement.
LLC Fiduciary Duties: The Significance of the Current AmendmentsBy Prof. Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, December 2021The governor recently signed into law SB 1795, which has made several significant changes regarding the law of fiduciary duties in LLCs.
Advantage Marketing Group, Inc. v. Keane: Seek a Waiver or Resign Before You Transact and SignBy Prof. Charles W. Murdock & Barbara MenesesBusiness and Securities Law, October 2020When a shareholder in a closely held corporation becomes disaffected, it is not unusual that they take actions somewhat similar to those that the plaintiff pled the defendant took in Advantage Marketing Group, Inc. v. Keane.
Machnicki v. Kurowski: Mądry Polak Po Szkodzie—After the Damage, Comes the WisdomBy Prof. Charles W. Murdock & Anabel AbarcaBusiness and Securities Law, October 2020In Machnicki v. Kurowski, the plaintiffs sought to partition real estate and ended up buying out the recalcitrant "partner" and getting hit with punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.
Saccameno v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC: Punitive Damages Awarded When Business Ignores Its Own DatabaseBy Connor Q. Hollander & Prof. Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, June 2020In Saccameno v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, the court affirmed a jury verdict of punitive damages for violating the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act based on Illinois’ corporate complicity doctrine.
Insider Trading UpdateBy Prof. Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, October 2019Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court grappled with the requirement that there needs to be a personal benefit to the tipper in order to hold the tippee liable in insider trading situations.
Kim v. Song: A primer on how not to plead a securities caseBy Prof. Charles W. Murdock, Jasmina Hamulic, & Ronni TanseyBusiness and Securities Law, November 2018Yoon Ja Kim v. James JH Song was predicated upon a tortuous interpretation of the Illinois Securities Law of 1953, the federal securities laws, and common law fraud.
The Sunlitz decision: A primer on shareholder demand for corporate books and records when self-dealing is at issueBy Charles W. Murdock & Katelyn SpragueBusiness and Securities Law, November 2015In Sunlitz Holding Co. W.L.L. v. Trading Block Holdings, Inc., the court reaffirmed the view that good-faith fears of mismanagement, in contrast to proof of actual wrongdoing, support a proper purpose for inspection of corporate books and records under the Business Corporations Act of 1983.
Boilerplate warnings no defense to fraud: The Second District’s decision in Rasgaitis v. WaterstoneBy Jennifer Fair & Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, October 2014A recent Second District case, Rasgaitis v. Waterstone Financial Group Inc., held that, among other things, cautionary language in life insurance policies and annuities did not shield investment advisors from investors’ claims.
Attorney malpractice for failure to file blue sky rescission noticeBy Tae Kim & Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, September 2014The case of Goldfine v. Barack, Ferrazzano, Kirschbaum & Perlman highlights the uncertainty of what is a sufficient rescission notice, and what is the appropriate calculation for damages under the statutory interest provision.
Creditors’ rights against a member’s interest in an LLCBy Charles W. MurdockCommercial Banking, Collections, and Bankruptcy, August 2012Effective January 1, 2012, the Code of Civil Procedure was amended to add a new provision by which the remedy of a charging order could be obtained, inter alia, by serving a citation to discover assets, either on the judgment debtor or against any third party who possesses property belonging to the judgment debtor.
Creditors’ rights against a member’s interest in an LLCBy Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, June 2012Effective January 1, 2012, the Code of Civil Procedure was amended to add a new provision by which the remedy of a charging order could be obtained, inter alia, by serving a citation to discover assets, either on the judgment debtor or against any third party who possesses property belonging to the judgment debtor.
Creditors’ rights against a member’s interest in an LLCBy Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, June 2012Effective January 1, 2012, the Code of Civil Procedure was amended to add a new provision by which the remedy of a charging order could be obtained, inter alia, by serving a citation to discover assets, either on the judgment debtor or against any third party who possesses property belonging to the judgment debtor.
Creditors’ rights against a member’s interest in an LLCBy Charles W. MurdockTrusts and Estates, June 2012Effective January 1, 2012, the Code of Civil Procedure was amended to add a new provision by which the remedy of a charging order could be obtained, inter alia, by serving a citation to discover assets, either on the judgment debtor or against any third party who possesses property belonging to the judgment debtor.
Fritzche v. LaPlante: Authorization procedures for corporate notes and leasesBy Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, March 2011The case demonstrates the importance to corporate counsel of familiarity with the Business Corporation Act in general, and of a particular corporation’s by-laws and board and shareholder minutes in particular.
Fontana v. TLD Builders, Inc.—A primer on piercing the corporate veilBy Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, November 2006In a case of first impression in Illinois, the Second District, in Fontana v. TLD Builders, Inc., held that a non-shareholder can be held liable when the corporate veil of a for-profit corporation is pierced.
Parent corporation liability for acts of its subsidiaryBy Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, June 2006When we think of the potential liability of a parent corporation for the acts of its subsidiary, we normally think of the situation in which the corporate veil of a subsidiary is sought to be pierced in order to hold the parent liable.
The Supreme Court’s decisions in Arthur Andersen and Dura PharmaceuticalsBy Ben Bartels & Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, January 2006In Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, 125 S.Ct. 2129, a unanimous Supreme Court overturned an obstruction of justice conviction for Enron’s chief auditor, Arthur Andersen.
Oppression and alternative remedies-Is the forced buy-out under 12.56(f) wise policy?By Charles W. MurdockBusiness and Securities Law, April 2005The 1983 Illinois Business Corporation Act ("BCA") as enacted, provided, in section 12.55 (805 ILCS 5/12.55), three alternative remedies in lieu of dissolving the corporation that a court could order in a deadlock or oppression or waste of assets situation.
Spot an error in your article? Contact Celeste Niemann at cniemann@isba.org. For information on obtaining a copy of an article, visit the ISBA Newsletters page.