Cunningham

Cunningham v. Magidow

Good Law
161 Cal. Rptr. 3d 671·2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 700·219 Cal. App. 4th 298·2013 WL 4654592
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 30, 2013B243474California2,624 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rothschild, J.

Kathleen Cunningham brought this shareholder derivative action on behalf of Royal Airline Linen, Inc. (Royal), against Norman Magidow. The trial court found Magidow liable for breach of fiduciary duty, awarded compensatory and punitive damages, and entered judgment accordingly. Magidow then forgave $452,000 of a loan he had made to Royal and moved for an order compelling Cunningham to acknowledge that the judgment had been partially satisfied in the amount of $452,000. The trial court granted the motion. Cunningham appeals, and we reverse.

BACKGROUND

Cunningham owns half the stock of Royal. Magidow owns the other half and is also an officer and director. Cunningham filed this shareholder derivative action against Magidow and other defendants, alleging claims for breach of fiduciary duty, usurpation of corporate opportunity, and conversion. Cunningham alleged that Magidow arranged for Royal to purchase certain supplies at inflated prices from a separate business owned by Magidow and that he failed to disclose his conflict of interest.

The breach of fiduciary duty claim against Magidow was tried to the court, which found in favor of Cunningham. The court found that…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.