Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
If the proposed corporate action is submitted to a vote at a meeting of shareholders
of a business corporation, any person who wishes to dissent and obtain payment of
the fair value of his shares must file with the corporation, prior to the vote, a
written notice of intention to demand that he be paid the fair value for his shares
if the proposed action is effectuated, must effect no change in the beneficial ownership
of his shares from the date of such filing continuously through the effective date
of the proposed action and must refrain from voting his shares in approval of such
action. A dissenter who fails in any respect shall not acquire any right to payment
of the fair value of his shares under this subchapter. Neither a proxy nor a vote
against the proposed corporate action shall constitute the written notice required
by this section.
Mitchell Partners, L.P. v. Irex Corp., 656 F.3d 201 (3rd Cir. 2011). · cites it 2דIf we were to adopt the interpretation of the statute advocated by defendants, this would mean that any shareholder who was deceived by the majority shareholder into voting for the merger would have no remedy at all for the breach of fiduciary duty.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.