Site /
Management And Voting Rights Of Creditors
Site.TopicsManagementVotingRights History
Hide minor edits - Show changes to output
Changed lines 19-25 from:
# [[2013OklahomaSouthlakeEquipmentVotingRights|+]] https://chargingorder.com/opinion-2013-oklahoma-southlake-equipment-voting-rights-charging-order.html
----
----
Green v. Bellerive Condominiums LP., 135 Md.App. 563, 763 A.2d 252 (Md.Sp.App., 2000).
# [[2000MarylandGreenManagementRights|+]] https://chargingorder.com/opinion-2000-maryland-green-management-rights-charging-order.html
to:
Changed lines 20-21 from:
to:
# [[2013OklahomaSouthlakeEquipmentVotingRights|+]] https://chargingorder.com/opinion-2013-oklahoma-southlake-equipment-voting-rights-charging-order.html
----
----
Green v. Bellerive Condominiums LP., 135 Md.App. 563, 763 A.2d 252 (Md.Sp.App., 2000).
# [[2000MarylandGreenManagementRights|+]] https://chargingorder.com/opinion-2000-maryland-green-management-rights-charging-order.html
----
----
Green v. Bellerive Condominiums LP., 135 Md.App. 563, 763 A.2d 252 (Md.Sp.App., 2000).
# [[2000MarylandGreenManagementRights|+]] https://chargingorder.com/opinion-2000-maryland-green-management-rights-charging-order.html
Changed line 16 from:
(:pagelist link=Category.Management_Voting list=normal:)
to:
(:pagelist link=Category.Management_Voting list=normal fmt=title:)
Changed line 6 from:
[[!Topic]] Management_Voting
to:
[[!Topic]] Management_Voting [-TopicsManagementVotingRights-]
Changed line 6 from:
[[!topic]] [[!managementvoting]]
to:
[[!Topic]] Management_Voting
Changed line 16 from:
(:pagelist link=Category.managementvoting list=normal:)
to:
(:pagelist link=Category.Management_Voting list=normal:)
Changed line 11 from:
Yet, courts continue to face arguments by creditors that as holders of charging orders they should have the right to participate in the management of the entity and vote the D/M's interests. While the courts have so far rejected these challenges (at least outside the SMLLC context), it would be preferable to amend the statute to make this clear.
to:
Yet, courts continue to face arguments by creditors that as holders of charging orders they should have the right to participate in the management of the entity and vote the D/M's interests. While the courts have so far rejected these challenges (at least outside the SMLLC context), it would be preferable to amend the statute to make this more clear.
Changed line 9 from:
The LLC and partnership acts state that a holder of a charging order is only a mere lienholder, and thus is not entitled to any management or voting rights of the entity whose interest has been charged. Similarly, even upon a foreclosure of an interest, the purchaser of the interest at the foreclosure sale becomes no better than an "involuntary assignee" who similarly has no management or voting rights (these remain with the debtor/member).
to:
The LLC and partnership acts state that a holder of a charging order is only a mere lienholder, and thus is not entitled to any management or voting rights of the entity whose interest has been charged. Similarly, even upon a foreclosure of an interest, the purchaser of the interest at the foreclosure sale becomes no better than an "involuntary assignee" who similarly has no management or voting rights (these remain with the debtor/member), which is one of the reasons why smart creditors rarely bother to foreclose the charging order lien.
Changed line 9 from:
The LLC and partnership acts state that a holder of a charging order is only a mere lienholder, and thus not entitled to any management or voting rights of the entity whose interest has been charged. Similarly, even upon a foreclosure of an interest, the purchaser of the interest at the foreclosure sale becomes no better than an "involuntary assignee" who similarly has no management or voting rights (these remain with the debtor/member).
to:
The LLC and partnership acts state that a holder of a charging order is only a mere lienholder, and thus is not entitled to any management or voting rights of the entity whose interest has been charged. Similarly, even upon a foreclosure of an interest, the purchaser of the interest at the foreclosure sale becomes no better than an "involuntary assignee" who similarly has no management or voting rights (these remain with the debtor/member).
Changed lines 19-21 from:
to:
Southlake Equipment Co., Inc. v. Henson Gravel & Sand, LLC, 213 Okla.Civ.App. 87 ( 2013).
Green v. Bellerive Condominiums LP., 135 Md.App. 563, 763 A.2d 252 (Md.Sp.App., 2000).
Green v. Bellerive Condominiums LP., 135 Md.App. 563, 763 A.2d 252 (Md.Sp.App., 2000).
Changed lines 1-4 from:
(:title TEXT:)
(:Summary:TEXT:)
(:description TEXT:)
(:keywords charging order, TEXT:)
(:Summary:
(:description TEXT
(:
to:
(:title Management And Voting Rights Of Creditors:)
(:Summary: Management And Voting Rights Of Creditors:)
(:description Management And Voting Rights Of Creditors:)
(:keywords charging order, manage, management, manager, vote, voting, voting rights:)
(:Summary: Management And Voting Rights Of Creditors:)
(:description Management And Voting Rights Of Creditors:)
(:keywords charging order, manage, management, manager, vote, voting, voting rights:)
Changed line 6 from:
[[!topic]] [[!TEXT]]
to:
[[!topic]] [[!managementvoting]]
Changed lines 9-12 from:
to:
The LLC and partnership acts state that a holder of a charging order is only a mere lienholder, and thus not entitled to any management or voting rights of the entity whose interest has been charged. Similarly, even upon a foreclosure of an interest, the purchaser of the interest at the foreclosure sale becomes no better than an "involuntary assignee" who similarly has no management or voting rights (these remain with the debtor/member).
Yet, courts continue to face arguments by creditors that as holders of charging orders they should have the right to participate in the management of the entity and vote the D/M's interests. While the courts have so far rejected these challenges (at least outside the SMLLC context), it would be preferable to amend the statute to make this clear.
Yet, courts continue to face arguments by creditors that as holders of charging orders they should have the right to participate in the management of the entity and vote the D/M's interests. While the courts have so far rejected these challenges (at least outside the SMLLC context), it would be preferable to amend the statute to make this clear.
Changed lines 14-16 from:
!!TEXT OPINIONS
(:pagelist link=Category.TEXT list=normal:)
(:pagelist link=Category.
to:
!!!MANAGEMENT AND VOTING RIGHTS OPINIONS
(:pagelist link=Category.managementvoting list=normal:)
(:pagelist link=Category.managementvoting list=normal:)
Changed line 6 from:
[[!topic]]
to:
[[!topic]] [[!TEXT]]
Changed lines 8-16 from:
[[<<]]
to:
[[<<]]
TEXT
----
!!TEXT OPINIONS
(:pagelist link=Category.TEXT list=normal:)
----
TEXT
TEXT
----
!!TEXT OPINIONS
(:pagelist link=Category.TEXT list=normal:)
----
TEXT
Added lines 1-8:
(:title TEXT:)
(:Summary: TEXT:)
(:description TEXT:)
(:keywords charging order, TEXT:)
(:linebreaks:)
[[!topic]]
[[<<]]
[[<<]]
(:Summary: TEXT:)
(:description TEXT:)
(:keywords charging order, TEXT:)
(:linebreaks:)
[[!topic]]
[[<<]]
[[<<]]