United States Ninth Circuit

In an action for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of a shareholder vote on a proposed merger, dismissal of the complaint is reversed where only partnership agreements may vary the unanimous ratification requirement of California law, and it would be "manifestly unreasonable" for a partnership agreement to include votes cast by an interested general partner or its affiliates in a ratification vote.

Appellate Information

• Argued 02/11/2008
• Decided 03/27/2008
• Published 03/27/2008

Judges

• Before DAVID R. THOMPSON and MILAN D. SMITH, JR., Circuit Judges, and WILLIAM Q. HAYES, District Judge.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Dennis A. Kendig, Kendig Law Firm, Encino, CA;  Daniel L. Germain, Rosman & Germain LLP, Encino, CA;  Edward J. Horowitz, a Professional Corporation, Pacific Palisades, CA;  Bruce Adelstein, Encino, CA, for the plaintiffs-appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Richard P. Tricker, Anderson, McPharlin & Conners, Los Angeles, CA;  Steffen Johnson, Winston & Strawn, Washington, DC, for the defendants-appellees.