Contact us with your California corporate & securities law questions (949) 353-6347 or Contact us here

Commissioner DuFauchard Proposes Broker-Dealer Safe Harbor Rule

In 2007, a California Court of Appeal held that corporate officers and directors may be subject to licensure as broker-dealers unless they receive a commission for the sale of securities.  People v. Cole, 156 Cal. App. 4th 452 (2007).  Although the...

Enforcing this Bylaw Could Land You in Jail!

Out-of-state practitioners are frequently surprised by some of California's laws, but I'm guessing that very few, if any, California lawyers are familiar with Business & Professions Code Section 16801. That section provides in part:

It is unlawful...

Supreme Court Set to Decide Constitutionality of the PCAOB

Although this blog is dedicated to California corporate and securities law topics, I couldn't resist a post regarding this pending decision. 

At the Supreme Court session this morning announcing opinions, the Chief Justice confirmed that the Court...

Appellate Court Finds Triable Issues of Fact in Alter Ego Claim

The Sixth District Court of Appeal recently addressed what it takes for someone to beat an alter ego claim on a motion for summary judgment.  In Zoran Corp. v. Chen, the plaintiff sued several companies and an individual for amounts owed to the...

Court of Appeal Applies Delaware Law to Sustain Demurrer to California Action

In the last few weeks, the various appellate districts of the Court of Appeal have been pumping out corporate law opinions.   The most recent, Fox v. JAMDAT Mobile, Inc., involves a stockholder lawsuit against a Delaware corporation, JAMDAT, and its...

CalPERS’ Proposed Placement Agent Disclosure Rule Likely to be Amended

Last year, the California legislature enacted AB 1584 as an urgency measure. That legislation required the retirement boards of each public pension or retirement system to develop and implement, on or before June 30, 2010, a policy requiring the...

“See Spot Run”

Yesterday, I wrote about "spot" bills and the process of gutting and amending bills in the California legislature.  So why have a spot bill at all?  The reason is that the legislative process is supposed to operate according to specific procedures. ...

California Appellate Court Decides California Law Applies “For Now” to Shareholder Derivative Suit Against Directors of a Nevada Corporation

Kruss v. Booth is a "must read" for lawyers confronting Section 2115 of the California Corporations Code. Section 2115 represents the California legislature's attempt to thumb its nose at the internal affairs doctrine. That doctrine holds that the...

California Legislature Takes On Citizens United by Proposing to Require Refunds to Shareholders Objecting to Political Expenditures

The California legislature has reacted to the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 50 (2010) by gutting and amending AB 919 (Nava).  That bill started out life last year as a "spot" bill.   A "spot"...

When Is A Director’s Inspection Right Not Absolute?

California Corporations Code Section 1602 provides that every director "shall have the absolute right at any reasonable time to inspect and copy all books, records and documents of every kind . . .". While the statute seems to brook no exceptions,...


We offer expert advice with the intricacies of California law.

Our years of experience and expertise allow us to help clients navigate the business laws in California.


Get the latest news and analysis about California Corporate & Securities law. Subscribe to our newsletter today!

We respect your email privacy


30172DBAB0084D3A8F39D7AF0A8E79BC.ashxKeith Paul Bishop
Partner at Allen Matkins
(949) 353-6328
 Contact me
Learn More About Keith





Get the latest news and analysis about California Corporate & Securities law. Subscribe to our newsletter today!

We respect your email privacy


see all