This is exactly what I was talking about in this recent post:
A day after I posted my blog on LLC breakups, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) issued a ruling regarding the break up of Prime Motor Group partners, Automile Holdings, LLC v. McGovern, __ Mass. __ (Jan. 14, 2020).
While not the main focus of the case, the SJC described the tactics that the majority used to force the minority owner to sell his shares in the company, as found by the trial judge.
First, they amended Prime’s operating agreement to remove a provision that allowed for the distribution of profits sufficient to cover the owners’ tax liabilities. Such provisions are commonplace, and without it, McGovern faced a tax liability of between $500,000 and $600,000 for the 2015 tax year. Additionally, Abrams and Rosenberg [collectively, the majority interest] denied McGovern access to Prime’s financial information, leaving McGovern unable to calculate his expected tax obligation for the 2016 tax year. Abrams and Rosenberg also demanded that McGovern and his wife return the company vehicles that they had been using and threatened to report McGovern to the authorities as being in possession of stolen automobiles. As the trial judge remarked, these tactics amounted to Rosenberg and Abrams applying “as much pressure as they could manage to put on [McGovern] to take the best deal they could get” in purchasing McGovern’s minority stake before the company’s anticipated liquidity event.
Slip Opinion at p. 6.
The SJC was less than impressed by these tactics. It indicated that:
the sale of McGovern’s business interest did not resemble a prototypical arm’s-length transaction with a third-party purchaser. Rather, Rosenberg and Abrams pressured McGovern to sell his interest to them, despite the fact that Abram’s company was the majority shareholder in a closely held corporation and owed a fiduciary duty of utmost good faith and loyalty in its dealings with minority shareholders.
Slip Opinion at 25.
This statement about “a fiduciary duty of utmost good faith and loyalty” to minority shareholders creates a powerful weapon for minority shareholders. To be sure, this is not new. The courts of Massachusetts have ruled on this duty for decades. And keep in mind that the duty applies to minority shareholders as well. But the fact that the SJC seemed to go out of its way to suggest a breach of this duty by high-pressure tactics bodes well for minority shareholders who will be litigating these claims in Massachusetts. One other takeaway here, McGovern was a sophisticated and experienced business person, but he was still subject to majority pressure tactics. Abrams got quality legal help and apparently sold his interest for full value. What will you do?
The decision also made some statements about restrictive covenants in employment agreements that should make Massachusetts employers very nervous. More on that later.
Adam P. Whitney
Fine print: the above is not legal advice, but general information. I cannot provide legal advice without a written fee agreement and a full review of your legal matter.
CONNECT WITH ADAM
RELATED PRACTICE AREAS
ADAM’S RECENT POSTS
Baby, It’s Cold Outside: Protecting Your Rights in LLC and Close Corporation Freeze-Outs in Massachusetts
Just like the bracing chill of a Massachusetts winter, experiencing a corporate freeze-out can feel cold and harsh. Whether you're part of a Limited Liability Company (LLC), partnership or a close corporation in Massachusetts, a thorough understanding of freeze-out...
A Business Breakup: How to Navigate a Toxic Business Partnership and Safeguard your Financial and Mental Health
Your business partnership started with a shared vision and enthusiasm, much like a marriage. But as many business owners know, partnerships can sour, making your daily operations a nightmare. If you find yourself as a minority owner or majority shareholder in an...
Sometimes bloodlines blur business lines. There's a potent blend of emotion and finance in family businesses. I've been in the trenches, witnessing brothers at odds with brothers, sons challenging fathers, and sibling rivalries taken to the extreme. A wise judge once...
Any lawyer worth their salt can dissect a noncompetition agreement and under Massachusetts law, predict its enforceability. Indeed, this forms the bedrock of sound legal advice, but it is merely the beginning. The real challenge lies in the practical and strategic...
When deciding whether to sign a separation agreement or severance agreement with your employer, consider the following issues: Consideration: What are you getting for your signature? What are you giving up? Is the trade-off worth it? Waiver of legal rights:...
GET IN TOUCH
Law Office of Adam P. Whitney265 Franklin Street, Suite 1702
Boston, MA 02110
ABOUT THE FIRM
Business Litigation and Employment Law
Outside General Counsel
Shareholder / LLC / Partnership Disputes
No attorney-client relationship is established by your use of this site. You must not send or share any confidential information about you or any legal issue without Attorney Whitney's express written permission. The content of this website may be considered advertising for legal services under the laws and rules of professional conduct. The content does not constitute legal advice. The content is for information purposes only. Legal advice cannot be provided unless you hire my firm and we perform a full review of the legal matter and the most current, applicable law. The law in your state may be different than Massachusetts, so the information in the content may be completely irrelevant if you are outside of Massachusetts.