We agree with the motion court's interpretation of the 1992 shareholder agreement preserving the original allocation of directors between the two family factions seeking corporate control. While an officer may be removed for cause even in the face of an agreement mandating his tenure (Fells v Katz, 256 N.Y. 67, 72), the court properly enjoined the majority shareholders' attempt to remove the corporate president because they failed to advance any additional facts warranting...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.