Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Fiduciary Duties Owed to Subsidiary

By Luis Salazar
August 30, 2006

On June 23, 2006, the jurisdiction that invented the 'zone of insolvency' delivered its latest lesson on the fiduciary duties of directors and officers of insolvent companies. The Delaware Bankruptcy Court, in In re Scott Acquisition Corp., ___ B.R. at ____, 2006 WL 1731277 (Bankr. D.Del. 2006), ruled that directors and officers of insolvent subsidiary companies owe fiduciary duties to both its creditors and the subsidiary itself. Before this, leading cases on this issue held that fiduciary duties were owed only to creditors and the single-shareholder, parent companies. Though the decision stands on some firm legal ground, it is sure to create more uncertainty and doubt in the boardroom.

Background

Scott Acquisition Corp. and Scotty's, Inc., its wholly owed subsidiary, were retailers of building materials and home improvement products for the do-it-yourself home-improvement market. Scotty's and its subsidiary filed for bankruptcy protection on Sept. 10, 2004; their case was later converted to Chapter 7, and a Trustee was appointed. The court's opinion arises out of the Trustee's lawsuit against the officers and directors of Scotty's, Inc., the subsidiary. In his complaint, the Trustee alleged that the directors and officers breached their duties of loyalty and care in connection with Scotty's pre-bankruptcy workout with its lenders.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.