Borne v. Gonstead Advanced Techniques, Inc.

¶ 21. (dissenting in part; concurring in part). The majority concludes that the injuries alleged in claims 1, 3, 4, and 5 of the complaint were primarily to the corporation and secondarily to the Borne Trust. The majority concludes that these claims were correctly dismissed because the Trust was not a registered stockholder at the time of the alleged injury-causing action. Majority at ¶¶ 14-16. I respectfully disagree. I believe the Trust sufficiently alleged a *268breach of fiduciary duty and that this claim is a direct action which may be brought by the Trust, even if the Trust was not a stock…