CORPORATIONS - PRE-EMPTIVE RIGHTS OF SHAREHOLDERS IN ORIGINALLY AUTHORIZED BUT UNISSUED CAPITAL STOCK
Vol: 40, Issue: 1, Page: 115-118
1941
- 83Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage83
- Downloads81
- Abstract Views2
Artifact Description
Plaintiff, a minority stockholder, brought an action to cancel 58,400 shares of originally authorized but unissued stock which the directors had issued to defendant general manager in payment of his services. Plaintiff contended this violated his pre-emptive right to subscribe to the shares and alleged the transaction was fraudulent in that defendant and the directors conspired to gain voting control. Held, the issue was proper because the stock was part of the first offering of original authorized capital stock to which plaintiff's pre-emptive right did not attach, and plaintiff failed to show collusion between directors and defendant to gain voting control and therefore did not state a case of fraud. Yasik v. Wachtel, (Del. Ch. 1941) 17 A. (2d) 309.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know