California Court of Appeal

In a shareholder derivative suit, involving a variation on a pump and dump scheme, the trial court's judgment of dismissal is reversed where: 1) plaintiff must be given leave to amend his second amended complaint so as to allege violations of director fiduciary duty under California law as he had alleged violations of California law in his first amended complaint, but the trial court erroneously thought the case was governed by Nevada law and required plaintiff to plead violations of Nevada law in the second amended complaint; and 2) the trial court erred in dismissing the suit as the second amended complaint alleged self-dealing on the part of the defendant directors that continued into the period when the plaintiff did own stock in the company.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/11/2010
• Published 06/11/2010

Judges

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Glancy Binkow & Goldberg, Lionel Z. Glancy, Neal A. Dublinsky, Jala A. Amsellem and Kara Wolfe for Plaintiff and Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Fredman Lieberman, Marc A. Lieberman, and Alan W. Forsley for Defendants and Respondents Jess Rae Booth, Walter Carlson, Glenn Easterbrook and James Kangas., Kaufman, Borgeest & Ryan, Jeffrey S. Whittington and Nicholas W. Sarris for Defendant and Respondent The Estate of Larry S. Poland.