12 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1963–2017 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Minnesota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Seitz v. Michelgreen2 sentences2009“Where the injury is to the corporation, and only indirectly harms the shareholder, the claim must be pursued as a derivative claim.” Id. at 464 ; see also Seitz v. Michel, 148 Minn. 80, 87 , 181 N.W. 102, 105 (1921). 2009“Where the injury is to the corporation, and only indirectly harms the shareholder, the claim must be pursued as a derivative claim.” Id. at 464 ; see also Seitz v. Michel, 148 Minn. 80, 87 , 181 N.W. 102, 105 (1921). | 2 | 2 |
Stocke v. Berrymangreen1 sentence2016Stocke v. Berryman, 632 N.W.2d 242, 247 (Minn. App. 2001), review denied (Minn. Sept. 25, 2001). | 1 | 1 |
Huffer v. Kozitzagreen1 sentence2013Huffer v. Kozitza, 375 N.W.2d 480, 482 (Minn.1985). | 1 | 1 |
Kaiser v. Northern States Power Co.green1 sentence2011See, e.g., Kaiser v. N. States Power Co., 353 N.W.2d 899, 902-03 (Minn. 1984). | 1 | 1 |
Northwest Racquet Swim & Health Clubs, Inc. v. Deloitte & Touchegreen1 sentence2009As a general rule, “an individual shareholder may not assert a cause of action that belongs to the corporation.” Northwest Racquet Swim & Health Clubs, Inc. v. Deloitte & Touche, 535 N.W.2d 612, 617 (Minn.1995). | 1 | 1 |
In Re UnitedHealth Group Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigationgreen1 sentence2009When a shareholder has alleged a derivative claim, the board of directors may, by resolution, form a “special litigation committee consisting of one or more ... independent persons to consider legal rights or remedies of the corporation and whether those rights and remedies should be pursued.” Minn.Stat. § 302A.241, subd. 1 (2008); see also In re UnitedHealth Group, 754 N.W.2d at 550 . | 1 | 1 |
Zapata Corp. v. Maldonadogreen1 sentence2002See Zapata Corp. v. Maldonado, 430 A.2d 779, 787 (Del.1981) (questioning whether “inquiry as to independence, good faith and reasonable investigation is sufficient safeguard against abuse”). | 1 | 1 |
Lewis v. Andersongreen2 sentences1999Id. at 1044 (citation omitted). 1999Id. at 1044 (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Olson v. Moorhead Country Clubgreen1 sentence1999“A party may amend a pleading by leave of court, ‘and leave shall be freely given when justice so requires.’” Olson v. Moorhead Country Club, 568 N.W.2d 871, 872 (Minn.App.1997) (quoting Minn. R. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Wessin v. Archives Corp.
green
2 sentences2016“Where the injury is to the corporation, and only indirectly harms the shareholder, the claim must be pursued as a derivative claim.” Id. 2009“Where the injury is to the corporation, and only indirectly harms the shareholder, the claim must be pursued as a derivative claim.” Id. at 464 ; see also Seitz v. Michel, 148 Minn. 80, 87 , 181 N.W. 102, 105 (1921). | 4 | 2001–2017 |
Skoglund v. Brady
green
2 sentences2017On appeal, this court concluded that the plaintiffs claim was a derivative claim because the plaintiff did “not allege an injury to himself that is separate and distinct from any injury to the corporation.” Id. at 22 . 2017Id. at 19 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Tooley v. Donaldson, Lufkin, & Jenrette, Inc.
green
2 sentences2016Acknowledging confusion caused by language in its earlier decisions, the court unequivocally held that “a direct, individual claim of stockholders that does not depend on harm to the corporation can also fall on all stockholders equally, without the claim thereby becoming a derivative claim.” Id. at 1037 . (emphasis added). 2016Moreover, the Delaware Supreme Court unequivocally held that “a direct, individual claim of stockholders that does not 10 depend on harm to the corporation can also fall on all stockholders equally, without the claim thereby becoming a derivative claim.” Tooley, 845 A.2d at 1037 .5 Moreover, certain shareholders, including appellant, suffered harm different than other shareholders. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Bena Townsite Co. v. Sauve
green
1 sentence1963In Bloedel v. Cromwell, 104 Minn. 487, 488 , 116 N. W. 947, 948 , this court, in discussing election laws, said: “* * * Election laws are to be construed so as to secure to every voter reasonable opportunity to vote and to have his vote counted as cast, when his intention can be ascertained from the ballot without violating statutory provisions. | 1 | 1963–1963 |
Bloedel v. Cromwell
green
1 sentence1963In Bloedel v. Cromwell, 104 Minn. 487, 488 , 116 N. W. 947, 948 , this court, in discussing election laws, said: “* * * Election laws are to be construed so as to secure to every voter reasonable opportunity to vote and to have his vote counted as cast, when his intention can be ascertained from the ballot without violating statutory provisions. | 1 | 1963–1963 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.