Legal Opinion

Warehime v. Warehime

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 4, 2001PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CAVANAUGH, J.:

¶ 1 The core issue for resolution on remand from the Supreme Court is whether the directors of a corporation can divest the majority shareholders of their voting control and vest control in themselves. We hold that they cannot.

¶ 2 The facts, as adduced at trial and taken from the trial court opinion, are as follows: Alan Warehime, the father of appellant Michael Warehime and appellee John Warehime, instituted two voting trusts in 1988 to control the majority of voting stock (Class B common stock) in Hanover Foods Corp. (HFC). Alan Ware-hime established the first trust with his…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Donahue v. Rodd Electrotype Co. of New England, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  2. Blasius Industries, Inc. v. Atlas Corp.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1988
  3. Condec Corporation v. Lunkenheimer CompanyCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1967
  4. Reifsnyder v. Pittsburgh Outdoor Advertising Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  5. Glenn v. Kittanning Brewing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Warehime v. WarehimeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  2. PETOW v. WarehimeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
  3. Jewelcor Management Inc. v. Thistle Group Holdings Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County2002

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API