Brandon v. Brandon Construction Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1DissentTom Glaze, Justice
I dissent because the majority totally ignores the appellee’s contention that the appellant should be estopped from bringing this action. If that issue were addressed, it would be clear that the appellee’s contention has merit and that the trial court should therefore be affirmed.
The general rule is that a minority stockholder cannot have relief in equity on account of the salaries paid to corporate officers, when the salary payments have been ratified by the majority stockholders. Fletcher, Cyclopedia of Private Corporations, § 1110 (1986). See also Cunningham v. Jaffe, 251 F.Supp. 143 (D.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Cunningham v. JaffeDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1966
- Howard Building Centre v. ThorntonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1984