Delaware Supreme Court: No Duty to Buy Out Minority Shareholders in Closely Held Corporations

by Snell & Wilmer

The Delaware Supreme Court recently considered whether the directors of a closely held corporation had a duty under common law fiduciary principles to repurchase a minority shareholder’s shares. The court also considered whether the covenant of good faith and fair dealing created such a duty within a shareholder’s purchase agreement. The court found no such duties in either instance, re-affirmed Delaware precedent on the issue and highlighted the importance of having an agreed-upon exit strategy for minority shareholders or members of closely held entities. The court’s decision in Blaustein v. Lord Baltimore Capital Corp., No. 272, 2013 (Del. Jan. 21, 2014), can be viewed here.

In 1999, Susan Blaustein (Blaustein), individually and as trustee of several trusts, became a minority shareholder in the Lord Baltimore Capital Corporation (Baltimore), a closely held Delaware corporation. Paragraph 7(d) of the Baltimore Shareholder’s Agreement, which Blaustein executed, addressed the repurchase of stock from minority shareholders. It provides:

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the Company may repurchase Shares upon terms and conditions agreeable to the Company and the Shareholder who owns the Shares to be repurchased provided that the repurchase is approved either (i) by a majority, being at least four, of all of the Directors of the Company then authorized (regardless of the number attending the meeting of the Board of Directors) at a duly called meeting of the Board of Directors or (ii) in writing by Shareholders who, in the aggregate, own of record or beneficially 70 percent or more of all Shares then issued and outstanding.

Despite the existence of this provision, Blaustein claimed that she purchased shares in Baltimore on the understanding that after ten years, she would have the opportunity to sell the stock back to Baltimore for full value. Blaustein’s understanding was based upon an alleged oral promise made to her by Louis B. Thalheimer, the Chief Executive Officer of Baltimore and Chairman of its board of directors.

After the expiration of ten years, Blaustein asked Baltimore to buy-out her shares at full value. In response, Baltimore’s board offered to purchase Blaustein’s shares at a 52 percent discount from the net asset value of her shares. Blaustein’s subsequent attempts to negotiate a higher repurchase price were rejected.

Blaustein filed suit in the Delaware Court of Chancery, alleging promissory estoppel, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The Court of Chancery dismissed Blaustein’s complaint with the exception of the claim for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and allowed her to amend her complaint to add a new breach of fiduciary duty claim and a new implied covenant claim. Later, the Court of Chancery granted summary judgment in favor of Baltimore on all of Blaustein’s remaining claims and denied her request to amend her complaint yet again. Blaustein appealed her breach of fiduciary duty and implied covenant of good faith claims. She did not appeal the dismissal of her other claims.

On appeal, Blaustein argued that Baltimore’s directors acted out of self-interest as majority shareholders when they failed to offer anything higher than a 52 percent discount on a share repurchase. Blaustein also claimed that she was entitled to a “non-conflicted corporate decision” on whether the shares would be repurchased and at what price. Blaustein argued that the board’s failure to offer anything higher than a 52 percent discount constituted a breach of the board’s fiduciary duties towards a minority shareholder. Blaustein also argued that Paragraph 7(d) of the Baltimore Shareholder’s Agreement contained an implied contractual right to good faith negotiation of stockholder redemption offers. The failure of the board of directors to offer anything more than 52 percent of net asset value constituted a breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, Blaustein claimed.

In rejecting Blaustein’s arguments as to her remaining claims, the Delaware Supreme Court affirmed two established legal principals under Delaware law. First, the directors of a closely held corporation have no general fiduciary duty to repurchase the stock of a minority stockholder. Second, an investor must rely upon contractual protections if liquidity is a matter of concern when investing in closely held entities. The court then looked to the plainly written terms of Paragraph 7(d) of the Baltimore Shareholder’s Agreement. The court found that Paragraph 7(d) “gives the stockholder and the company discretion as to whether to engage in a transaction, and as to the price. It does not impose any affirmative duty on either party to consider or negotiate any repurchase proposal.” Because there is no general fiduciary duty at common law to repurchase the stock of a minority stockholder, and the Baltimore Shareholder’s Agreement does not create a duty to do so, there was no breach of fiduciary duty by the directors of Baltimore towards Blaustein. Similarly, the court noted that the “implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing cannot be employed to impose new contract terms that could have been bargained for but were not. Rather, the implied covenant is used in limited circumstances to include what the parties would have agreed to themselves had they considered the issue in their original bargaining positions at the time of contracting.” In this case, the parties had obviously considered the issue of whether, and on what terms, Baltimore minority shareholders might have their stock repurchased by the company. That consideration found its final expression in Paragraph 7(d) of the Shareholder’s Agreement. Thus, there was no breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing in this instance. Finally, the court noted that the factual allegations by Blaustein with regard to Louis B. Thalheimer’s offer to buy back Blaustein’s shares after ten years “suggest a claim for fraud in the inducement.” However, the court pointed out that Blaustein never pled fraud in any of her complaints. Therefore, the court declined to consider whether relief was available to Blaustein under a theory of fraud in the inducement.

Blaustein v. Lord Baltimore Capital Corp. is useful to closely held businesses, minority investors in such businesses, and lawyers. For closely held businesses, Blaustein reaffirms that, that under Delaware law, the duties of directors towards minority shareholders or members will be squarely governed by the shareholder or operating agreement. For minority investors in closely held businesses, Blaustein illustrates that an exit strategy and formula to value shares or member interest should be created before investing, and memorialized in whatever agreement governs the relationship between the business entity and its investors. Oral promises that contradict those agreements are unlikely to be enforced. Finally, for lawyers, Blaustein is a cold reminder of the importance of sometimes pleading all possible causes of action that the facts support.


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Snell & Wilmer | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Snell & Wilmer

Snell & Wilmer on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.