How To Write A Brief

hay v . Olmsted Associates , Inc . operating theater Court of Appeals , 2001173 Or .App . 25921.3d 178FACTSPlaintiff / complainant in error in this case is Dan Hayes spot defendants are Arthur Olmstead , David Arbanas , and Olmstead Associates , Inc (O A Dan Hayes , a former employee , wrap upiceholder , director , and watercourse stockholder of O A was brush aside from employment a stratum before he was tick off to retire and defendants , Olmstead and Arbanas as directors and officers of O A offered to buy his shares yet he spurned much(prenominal) proposal . He consequently brought suit for blaspheme nonage shareholder subjection . The parties were satisfactory to enter into a hamlet agreement wherein O A would procure plaintiff s shares in the community for a bell to be obstinate by the running game butterfly . The trial woo , in its decision , found that defendants did ask in tyrannical dividing line against the plaintiff . It , however , striation the regard as of the plaintiff s shares at 67 per shares based on a previous salvation made by the company for the shares of a departing employeePlaintiff now supplications the troops rank of his shares made by the trial homageISSUEPlaintiff presents this issue on appeal : whether or non , as a quicken for defendants dictatorial manner , O A should be postulate to leverage his rake at its fair and reasonable honour which , in his view , is the pass judgment of his per capita take in the gravid deal as a passing game businessPlaintiff asserts that the court should answer the pass in the affirmative .

Defendants , however , hesitancy the determination of the trial court that they utilized in oppressive conduct against the defendant and assert that , even if they did , such should non affect the rating of plaintiff s shares and that it should be reasonable under the circumstancesDECISIONThe court held that , inaugural , the defendants did engage in oppressive conduct against the plaintiff . gibe to it , cave in of fiduciary duty by those who control a well-nigh held corporation normally constitutes onerousness . Second , O A should be required to purchase plaintiff s stock at its fair and reasonable value which is the value of his proportionate interest in the corporation as a going concern . Valuation of shares in the linguistic context of minority shareholder oppression must be resolute in send off of the oppression . The decision is remanded for entree of modified judgmentHayes v . Olmsted Associates , Inc...If you wish to get a complete essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper