- 30 -
went to great lengths to assure that the shares held by an
outsider could not be transferred to another outsider. Every
shareholder who was outside the extended Weitzenhoffer family was
a Seminole employee (or spouse thereof in the case of Ms. High),
whose shares had to be redeemed when the shareholder retired. It
is not unreasonable under the facts herein to conclude that a
hypothetical buyer of the estate's shares would contemplate that
a member of the Weitzenhoffer family, or Seminole itself, would
pay a greater price for those shares as long as they were owned
by a nonfamily member who was not an employee. A closely held
family corporation such as Seminole is typically managed with
little formality and with little concern for the respective
ownership interests of family member shareholders. Adding a
nonfamily shareholder minus conditions under which his or her
shares may be recalled can cause havoc to the business'
harmonious operation. The nonfamily shareholder, for example,
may demand a return on his or her investment that the family
member shareholders are unwilling to give, may otherwise create
an unpleasant and unrewarding working environment, or may strive
to acquire a majority of the outstanding shares. See O'Neal &
Thompson, O'Neal's Close Corporations sec. 7.02 (3d ed. 1994). A
nonfamily shareholder also may continually second-guess the
actions of a family shareholder, director, or officer, or group
thereof, as unlawful attempts to usurp the rights of a minority
shareholder in favor of the family. See Pepper v. Litton,
308 U.S. 295, 306 (1939); Southern Pac. Co. v. Bogert, 250 U.S.
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011