Court Opinion

ID: 9617309
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 04:54:08.530006+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:04:07.992305
License: Public Domain

BENCH, Judge
(concurring and dissenting):
I concur with the main opinion’s treatment of the jurisdiction issue and the contribution claim. I respectfully dissent, however, from the main opinion’s treatment of the negligence claim against Larsen.
Harris’s claim as a guarantor on a corporate debt is not, as a matter of law, a claim that may be maintained only as a shareholder’s derivative action. Harris’s status as a guarantor gave him individual standing to assert a claim against Larsen because, unlike other shareholders, Harris was personally liable on the debt. I would therefore reverse the summary judgment and allow Harris’s predecessor to proceed with its negligence claim.