Opinion ID: 1224651
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: These Ex-TEWCA Members Lack Standing To Press A Derivative Claim

Text: By analogy to the continuous-ownership-rule requirement for shareholder derivative actions, [22] it is clear that a former member of an unincorporated association  i.e., one who no longer has a stake or interest in the association  cannot be deemed fit to represent fairly and adequately the association in a derivative suit. Moreover, to press a derivative claim, a plaintiff must have standing as a non-Hohfeldian plaintiff  i.e., one who sues to secure judicial relief that would benefit other persons or the community as a whole. [23] The interest tendered for judicial vindication in a derivative action is neither personal nor proprietary. [24] The plaintiffs here are suing not to confer a benefit on TEWCA, but for the exoneration of their own individual liability. Because these former members no longer have a stake in TEWCA and are trying to affect that entity in a negative manner, they cannot be described as acting on its behalf as non-Hohfeldian plaintiffs. [25]