Gaddy v. Phelps County Bank

20 S.W.3d 511 (2000)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Gaddy v. Phelps County Bank

Missouri Supreme Court
20 S.W.3d 511 (2000)

Facts

Phelps County Bank (Phelps Bank) (defendant) was a private Missouri banking corporation. Phelps County Bancshares, Inc. (Bancshares) (defendant) was a private Missouri holding company that owned 25,856 shares of Phelps Bank stock, which comprised 95.4 percent of the outstanding stock. A majority of Phelps Bank shareholders approved an amendment of Phelps Bank’s articles of agreement to authorize a one-share-for-1,000-shares reverse stock split and increase Phelps Bank’s capital. The amendment prohibited Phelps Bank from issuing any fractional shares. Accordingly, for any shareholders whose interest would be less than one share due to the reverse stock split, the amendment provided for a payment of $560 per share for each share of stock that the shareholders held immediately before the amendment became effective. Certain minority shareholders (the minority shareholders) (plaintiffs), who collectively owned 0.3 percent of Phelps Bank stock, sued Phelps Bank and Bancshares on the ground that the reverse stock split constituted a taking of private property for private use without the consent of the owner in violation of Missouri’s constitution. The parties each moved for summary judgment. The trial court granted summary judgment for Phelps Bank and Bancshares. The minority shareholders appealed, and the appellate court transferred the case to the Missouri Supreme Court. On appeal, the minority shareholders maintained that the reverse stock split constituted an impermissible taking for private use, as opposed to a taking due to public necessity. Additionally, the minority shareholders argued that no Missouri banking statute authorized a reverse stock split, that the reverse stock split violated a Missouri statute prohibiting a bank from purchasing its own stock, and that the trial court’s ruling violated fundamental principles of equity, fair dealing, and shareholder protection.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)

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 811,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership