15 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5793
Review of contested corporate action.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
PA-LEGpalegis.us
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 5793. Review of contested corporate action.
(a) General rule.--Upon application of any person aggrieved by any corporate action, the court may hear and determine the validity of the corporate action.
(b) Powers and procedures.--By entering an appropriate order, the court may enforce the production of any books, papers and records of the corporation and other relevant evidence that may relate to the issue. The court shall provide for notice of the pendency of the proceedings under this section to all persons affected thereby. If it is determined that no valid corporate action has been taken, the court may order a meeting to be held in accordance with section 5792 (relating to proceedings prior to corporate action).
(c) Cross reference.--See section 6145 (relating to applicability of certain safeguards to foreign domiciliary corporations).
(Dec. 21, 1988, P.L.1444, No.177, eff. Oct. 1, 1989; July 9, 2013, P.L.476, No.67, eff. 60 days)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case: Ciamaichelo v. Independence Blue Cross
Ciamaichelo v. Independence Blue Cross (2007)
“15 Pa.C.S. § 5793(a) (emphasis added) (footnote omitted).”
Petty v. Hospital Service Ass'n (2011)
“2 *1007 The trial court found appellants lacked standing to challenge Blue Cross’s alleged violations of the Nonprofit Law, as they did not fall within the standing limitations set by 15 Pa.C.S. § 5793(a). 3 In reaching this conclusion, the court examined Blue Cross’s…”
Petty v. Hospital Service Ass'n of Northeastern Pennsylvania (2009)
“On remand in Ciamaichelo III, we held that Independence’s subscribers had standing and a right to relief under Section 5793(a) of the Nonprofit Law, 15 Pa. C.S. § 5793(a), 5 because based on an examination of Independence’s Articles of Incorporation, they placed subscribers in…”
Lutz v. TANGLWOOD LAKES COMMUNITY ASS'N (2005)
“On August 15, 2003, Lutz filed a petition to review contested corporate action pursuant to Section 5793(a) of the Law, 15 Pa.C.S. § 5793(a). [2] He alleged that neither Section 5726 of the Law, 15 Pa.”
In Re Estate of Bartol (2004)
“15 Pa.C.S. § 5793 (footnote omitted) (emphasis added).”
White v. Associates in Counseling and Child Guidance, Inc. (2001)
“14. She alleged that the Board and George engaged in activities that present a continuing threat to ACCG’s existence in violation of the regulations of the State Board of Psychology and in violation of the Professional Psychologists Practice Act, Act of March 23, 1972, P.”
Lewis v. Pennsylvania Bar Ass'n (1997)
“[6] Lewis and Sprague also argue that they were entitled to the production of documents under 15 Pa.C.S. § 5793, which provides that the member may seek relief in court, and relief under 15 Pa.”
Assalita v. Chestnut Ridge Homeowners Ass'n (2005)
“On February 18, 2003, the Assalitas filed a petition for review of contested corporate action under the Nonprofit Corporation Law of 1988, 15 Pa.C.S. § 5793. The As- *1217 salitas requested that the court order that: (1) the Association lacked authority to vacate, abandon or…”
Keranko v. Washington Youth Baseball, Inc. (1990)
“Accordingly, the Kerankos assert that their standing is conferred by Section 5793(a) of the Nonprofit Corporation Law of 1988, (Law) 15 Pa.C.S. § 5793(a). 3 That Section provides: Upon petition of any person whose status as, or whose rights or duties as, a member, director,…”
Hart v. Manning (2003)
“15 Pa.C.S. § 5793(a). See also Section 5782 of the Law which provides, in pertinent part: (a) General rule.”
In re Foundation for Anglican Christian Tradition (2014)
“” 15 Pa.C.S. § 5793(a). However, Raw-son states that "the standing requirements of that law are irrelevant to this case,” and he does not argue that he has standing under this provision.”
Tsucalas v. Holy Xenophone Monastery (2007)
“Section 5793(a) of the Nonprofit Corporation Law, 15 Pa.C.S. § 5793(a), provides that "[u]pon petition of any person whose status as, or whose rights or duties as, a member, director, .”
— 15 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5793(a) — 16 cases
Ciamaichelo v. Independence Blue Cross (2007)
“15 Pa.C.S. § 5793(a) (emphasis added) (footnote omitted).”
Petty v. Hospital Service Ass'n (2011)
“2 *1007 The trial court found appellants lacked standing to challenge Blue Cross’s alleged violations of the Nonprofit Law, as they did not fall within the standing limitations set by 15 Pa.C.S. § 5793(a). 3 In reaching this conclusion, the court examined Blue Cross’s…”
Petty v. Hospital Service Ass'n of Northeastern Pennsylvania (2009)
“On remand in Ciamaichelo III, we held that Independence’s subscribers had standing and a right to relief under Section 5793(a) of the Nonprofit Law, 15 Pa. C.S. § 5793(a), 5 because based on an examination of Independence’s Articles of Incorporation, they placed subscribers in…”
Lutz v. TANGLWOOD LAKES COMMUNITY ASS'N (2005)
“On August 15, 2003, Lutz filed a petition to review contested corporate action pursuant to Section 5793(a) of the Law, 15 Pa.C.S. § 5793(a). [2] He alleged that neither Section 5726 of the Law, 15 Pa.”
White v. Associates in Counseling and Child Guidance, Inc. (2001)
“14. She alleged that the Board and George engaged in activities that present a continuing threat to ACCG’s existence in violation of the regulations of the State Board of Psychology and in violation of the Professional Psychologists Practice Act, Act of March 23, 1972, P.”
— 15 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5793(b) — 2 cases
Ciamaichelo v. Independence Blue Cross (2007)
“15 Pa.C.S. § 5793(a) (emphasis added) (footnote omitted).”
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.