- 7 -
against her daughter-in-law Katherine and her son-in-law Damian.
She stated:
I am shocked that Bill’s response to a business
situation is to inflict pain on my children. Does a
chief executive officer have authority, and is it
proper corporate policy, to exact retribution against
shareholders with whom he disagrees? The Board of
Directors will have to deal with the issues raised by
these actions.
At a July 12, 1993, annual shareholders meeting, the Hobler
family elected three members of their choosing, including Ralph
Lobdell, to the 7-member Maritz Inc. board of directors. That
same day, at a meeting of the Maritz Inc. board of directors,
Ralph Lobdell introduced three resolutions. One resolution
called for reinstating Katherine in her former position with the
corporation and for compensating her for lost wages and benefits,
as well as “for any emotional and/or physical damages she may
have suffered” as a result of her termination, in amounts to be
determined by a committee of independent directors. Another
resolution called for reinstating First Capitol as a supplier to
Maritz Inc. and for compensating First Capitol for “lost profits
on the cancelled orders * * * and any other damages (if any) it
may have suffered”. The other resolution called for a committee
to review the termination of the vendor/customer relationship
between First Capitol and Maritz Inc., which it characterized as
First Capitol’s “largest customer”, as well as the termination of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011