Opinion ID: 888269
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Reasonable Shareholder Expectations

Text: ¶ 30 Brian argues that he had a reasonable expectation that he would retain his stock value, which he regarded as his inheritance, regardless of his status as an employee or officer of the corporation. We have explained that the expectations of a shareholder in a closely held corporation must be gleaned from the evidence presented. That is the province of the District Court.... Fox, 198 Mont. at 210, 645 P.2d at 933 (internal citation omitted). ¶ 31 Assessing Brian's reasonable expectations, the District Court made two holdings. As alluded to in the above discussion, the District Court first held that because Brian acquired a vast majority of his shares by gift and at a time when he was receiving no benefit from them, he had no capital investment that would lead to a reasonable expectation of benefit from holding his shares. Second, the District Court held that only Brian and Earl's employment by the farm caused them to receive the full benefits as employees and officers ... and that his reasonable expectations in continuing to receive these benefits were destroyed by his own wrongful actions. ¶ 32 Brian has failed to point to any reasonable expectation as a shareholder that has been violated. As demonstrated above, a shareholder's expectations within this corporation were necessarily limited and, importantly, there is no evidence of an intention to exercise leverage and `squeeze' the dissenter out. Fox, 198 Mont. at 209, 645 P.2d at 933. The only benefits Brian lost were those associated with his status as an employee and officer, which he had no reasonable expectation to retain after he converted the Corporation's property. Any expectation regarding his right to participate in the management has not been violated because he can, and has, participated as a shareholder in nominating and electing directors. Indeed, he has been encouraged to do so by the Corporation.