Logourl black
From our private database of 13,800+ case briefs...

Fletcher v. A.J. Industries, Inc.

California Court of Appeal
72 Cal. Rptr. 146, 266 Cal. App. 2d 313 (1968)


Facts

Shareholders (plaintiffs) filed a derivative action against A.J. Industries, Inc. (AJ), directors Ver Halen and Malone, and other board members (defendants). The plaintiffs alleged that Ver Halen had “dominated” company management and caused substantial harm. Ver Halen also allegedly breached his employment contract. The plaintiffs also argued that Malone had been excessively compensated. The plaintiffs sought damages of $134,000 from Ver Halen and $1,000,000 from the other named defendants, as well as equitable relief. During settlement negotiations, the parties agreed to a deal that included amendments to Ver Halen’s employment contract and limitations on his voting power, Malone’s ouster, the insertion of four new directors on the board, and the employment of a new operations officer. The specific instances of mismanagement by Ver Halen were to be referred to a future arbitration, which would be empowered to award attorneys’ fees to the plaintiffs’ attorneys only if AJ received a monetary award. The parties knew that the plaintiffs’ attorneys would apply for fees and costs from the trial court. The trial court awarded $64,784 in attorneys’ fees and $2,179.26 in costs after determining that (1) the shareholders hired the attorneys in good faith to prosecute the suit, (2) the company could pay the fees, and (3) AJ received substantial benefits from the settlement. The award of attorneys’ fees was appealed to the Court of Appeals of California.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Rattigan, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Dissent (Christian, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 169,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.