Albers

Albers v. Guthy-Renker Corp.

Good Law
92 F. App'x 497
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 17, 2004No. 02-56673; D.C. No. CV-99-03573-GAFCalifornia1,287 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Appellants Marcella T. Albers and her son, Raymond Albers, Jr., appeal the dismissal of their action against the Guthy-Renker Corporation, Guthy-Renker Internet, LLC, Bill Guthy, and Greg Renker. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Appellants’ direct theory of shareholder recovery fails because their claims are based on representations made by Guthy-Renker — representations which allegedly caused Ad Choice to lose money. However, under Texas law, shareholders in a corporate entity have no standing to sue for injuries suffered by that entity. 1 Faour v. Faour, 789 S.W.2d 620, 622 (Tex. App.1990) (“A corporate shareholder has no individual cause of action for personal damages caused solely by wrong done to the corporation.”) (citations omitted); see also Gamboa v. Shaw, 956 S.W.2d 662, 666 (Tex.App.1997) (“The cause of action against one who has injured the corporation belongs to the corporation and not to the shareholders. This is true even where the wrong has depreciated the value of the shareholder’s investment in the corporation or otherwise harmed the shareholder.”) (citations omitted).

That Ad Choice is a limited liability…

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.