Barton

Barton v. Khan

Good Law
157 Cal. App. 4th 1216·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 2017·69 Cal. Rptr. 3d 238
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 13, 2007B190428California1,827 words

Opinion

Opinion

Armstrong, J.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

Plaintiff and appellant Kenneth Barton, a shareholder of defendant RPost International Limited (RPost) was, until 2004, also an employee, officer and director of the company. Defendants Zafar Khan, Terrance Tomkow and Henri Isenberg (together, the Individual Defendants) were, during the relevant time period, officers and directors of RPost.

Barton’s original complaint alleged three causes of action: intentional and negligent breach of fiduciary duty against the Individual Defendants, and Labor Code violations against RPost. On August 19, 2005, RPost filed its answer and the Individual Defendants filed a demurrer to the complaint, contending that Barton’s causes of action against them were derivative in nature, and therefore were required to be brought by the corporation or by way of a derivative lawsuit pursuant to Corporations Code section 800, subdivision (b). They also argued that, to the extent Barton’s claims were direct rather than derivative, they lacked merit by reason of the business judgment rule contained in Corporations Code section 309. Hearing on the demurrer was set for September 19, 2005.

On September 16, 2005, in lieu of…

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.