Blogs > Shareholder Disputes in New Jersey

oppression

Feb 16, 2017

How An Employee/Shareholder Can Protect Oneself Against Oppression

Because termination of one’s employment does not necessarily equate to shareholder oppression under New Jersey law, as seen in my last post, it is often a good idea to take proactive measures to inoculate yourself against a termination that leaves you in the company as a shareholder, but not as an employee.  » Read More

Feb 13, 2017

Termination of Employment as Minority Shareholder Oppression

A common theme among minority shareholders seeking legal representation is termination of employment.  Readers of this blog may be aware that termination can often constitute minority shareholder oppression, warranting a remedy such as a court-ordered buyout.  But, unfortunately, not all terminations are equal, as not all terminations constitute oppression. » Read More

Aug 31, 2016

What To Do If Filing Shareholder Dispute Litigation Might Potentially Harm The Company

To negotiate – or to sue?  That is the question when the decision to sue might potentially hurt the company.

A minority shareholder (or LLC member) in New Jersey is often faced with a difficult choice.  Confronted with mounting evidence of shareholder oppression and improper conduct by the majority, minority shareholders may have the right to sue and attempt to force a buyout of their shares.  » Read More

Jan 17, 2014

Get out of That New Jersey LLC before the Law Changes?

In my last post, I wrote about the fact that your right to simply withdraw from a New Jersey LLC and be paid fair market value for your shares – provided the Operating Agreement does not prohibit this – is being eliminated on March 1, 2014.  » Read More

Nov 20, 2013

Termination of LLC Member Employee Could Soon Be Considered “Oppression”

Recently, a defendant testified in a deposition that I was conducting that there was no reason that he could not fire my client, who was a 28% minority shareholder in a New Jersey corporation.  Since the defendant was the majority (51%) owner, he believed he could fire whomever he wanted. » Read More

Subscribe