Stuparich v. Harbor Furniture Mfg., Inc.
California Court of Appeal
83 Cal.App.4th 1268 (2000)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Ann Stuparich and Candi Tuttleton (plaintiffs) were sisters who each owned 19.05 percent of the voting and one-third of the non-voting shares in Harbor Furniture Manufacturing, Inc. (Harbor Furniture). Their brother, Malcolm, owned 51.56 percent of the voting shares. The plaintiffs became generally frustrated with the management of the corporation, including the failure to observe corporate formalities. The corporation had two operations, a mobile home park and its original furniture manufacturing operation. The furniture manufacturing operation had become unsuccessful, incurring losses, while the mobile home park was very profitable. The plaintiffs proposed formally separating the operations to insulate the profits of the mobile home park. Malcolm refused to discuss the proposal and later refused the plaintiffs’ request to buy them out. At that point, the plaintiffs became so frustrated that they stopped attending annual meetings. Throughout this time period, the plaintiffs continued to receive monthly dividends from the corporation. Nonetheless, they brought suit, seeking involuntary dissolution of the corporation. Harbor Furniture moved for summary judgment and the motion was granted. The plaintiffs appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Epstein, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 824,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 989 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.