<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>Dickinson Mackaman Tyler &#38; Hagen PC &#187; Iowa LLC Blog</title>
	<link>http://www.dickinsonlaw.com</link>
	<description>Des Moines, Iowa Law Firm</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 16:54:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	<!-- generator="WordPress/3.1.1" -->

	<item>
		<title>LLC operating agreement can supplant implied duty of good faith</title>
		<description><![CDATA[A recent Delaware Court of Chancery ruling suggests drafters of LLC operating agreements may want to consider establishing a process by which managers of LLCs can be deemed to act in good faith and avoid application of the implied duty of good faith.]]></description>
		<link>http://www.dickinsonlaw.com/2012/04/llc-operating-agreement-can-supplant-implied-duty-of-good-faith/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Charging orders cannot grant managerial rights in an LLC</title>
		<description><![CDATA[The Nevada Supreme Court ruled in Weddell v. H2O, Inc., 128 Nev. Adv. Op. #9, (Nev. March 1, 2012) that a judgment creditor is like an assignee of a membership interest.  The creditor is entitled to only the share of the distributions the member would otherwise have received.  The managerial interest of the debtor remains with the debtor. ]]></description>
		<link>http://www.dickinsonlaw.com/2012/03/charging-orders-cannot-grant-managerial-rights-in-an-llc/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Iowa Supreme Court applies business judgment rule to nonprofit corporations</title>
		<description><![CDATA[We don’t often see a business judgment rule case emanate from the Iowa Supreme Court, so when one comes along, even in the context of a nonprofit condominium owners’ association, I am compelled to comment on it. ]]></description>
		<link>http://www.dickinsonlaw.com/2012/02/iowa-supreme-court-applies-business-judgment-rule-to-nonprofit-corporations/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Single member LLCs and the risk of veil piercing</title>
		<description><![CDATA[With good fortune this unpublished opinion by the Colorado Court of Appeals will be reversed on appeal.  Until then, lawyers need to take notice of this case because it is indicative of the risk inherent in operating a single member LLC.]]></description>
		<link>http://www.dickinsonlaw.com/2012/02/single-member-llcs-and-the-risk-of-veil-piercing/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Delaware court issues key opinion on fiduciary duties owed to LLC members</title>
		<description><![CDATA[On January 27, 2012, the Delaware Chancery Court issued a 75-page opinion explaining how fiduciary duties are owed by a manager to an LLC's members absent an expressed limitation or elimination in the operating agreement.]]></description>
		<link>http://www.dickinsonlaw.com/2012/02/delaware-court-issues-key-opinion-on-fiduciary-duties-owed-to-llc-members/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Boilerplate in LLC operating agreements is risky business</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Risk Management Services, LLC v. Moss provides an interesting lesson on the importance of covering all elements of an LLC’s existence within the operating agreement, including the expulsion or termination of a fellow member.]]></description>
		<link>http://www.dickinsonlaw.com/2011/07/boilerplate-in-llc-operating-agreements-is-risky-business/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Ambiguous provisions may blur line between customary capital call and personal liability of LLC members</title>
		<description><![CDATA[In Racing Investment Fund 2000 v. Clay Ward Agency, Inc., 320 S.W.3d 654 (Ky. 2010), an LLC creditor attempted to force the LLC to call for capital from the members in order to satisfy the creditor’s judgment claim for unpaid insurance premiums.  The creditor’s attempt was based on a capital call provision in the LLC operating agreement.]]></description>
		<link>http://www.dickinsonlaw.com/2011/06/ambiguous-provisions-may-blur-the-line-between-customary-capital-call-and-personal-liability-of-llc-members/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Delaware Chancery Court issues an important ruling on poison pills and hostile takeovers</title>
		<description><![CDATA[In a comprehensive, 153-page ruling, Chancellor Chandler provides a detailed overview of the responsibilities of a target board when faced with a structurally non-coercive, all-cash, fully financed hostile takeover. ]]></description>
		<link>http://www.dickinsonlaw.com/2011/02/delaware-chancery-court-issues-an-important-ruling-on-poison-pills-and-hostile-takeovers/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Iowa State Bar Association&#8217;s Business Law Council opposes HSB 42</title>
		<description><![CDATA[HSB 42 would amend the Iowa Business Corporation Act to mandate that publicly-held Iowa corporations have staggered terms for board of directors and only permit directors of such boards to be removed for cause.  The ISBA Business Law Council opposes the bill because it is contrary to the principle that shareholders should have a say in all fundamental corporate governance issues.]]></description>
		<link>http://www.dickinsonlaw.com/2011/02/isba-business-law-council-opposes-hsb-42/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Single member LLCs cannot escape the authority of a bankruptcy trustee</title>
		<description><![CDATA[In re First Protection, Inc., 2010 WL 5059589 (9Th Cir. BAP [Ariz.] November 22, 2010) is another case involving the attempt by a single member of an LLC to prevent a bankruptcy trustee from exercising management rights over the LLC.  ]]></description>
		<link>http://www.dickinsonlaw.com/2011/01/single-member-llcs-cannot-escape-the-authority-of-a-bankruptcy-trustee/</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>
