Hanson v. Kake Tribal Corp.
Alaska Supreme Court
1DissentFabe, Justice
I. INTRODUCTION
I dissent from the opinion of the court because I disagree with its decision to allow plaintiffs to bring a direct rather than a derivative action. The gravamen of the plaintiffs’ complaint is a wrong to the corporation as a whole. Basic principles of corporation law therefore require the plaintiffs to bring a derivative shareholder action to remedy that wrong. The court’s failure to adhere to this well-established rule leads it to adopt a result that rather than remedying the discriminatory plan, continues it. Under the court’s decision, shareholders who are as innocent of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- J. I. Case Co. v. BorakSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Donahue v. Rodd Electrotype Co. of New England, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- Jones v. H. F. Ahmanson & Co.California Supreme Court · 1969
- Broad v. Sealaska Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- Alaska Plastics, Inc. v. CoppockAlaska Supreme Court · 1980
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.