When Minor Children Own Stock in Small Business

Dear Rich: I own a small business. My children and I are stockholders. Since they are minor children, I presume, but am not certain, I can exercise any authority over their stockholder proxy at a corporate meeting. Does Nolo have any books are web links for information on this? This question is way far afield for the Dear Rich Staff. However, we work not far from knowledgeable corporate attorney and ultra-runner, Diana Fitzpatrick, who provided us with a helpful answer.
It all depends on how it's owned. Whether or not the parent can vote the stock held by a minor child depends on how the stock is owned or held by the minor. Minors can't purchase or open brokerage accounts because they can't enter into legally binding contracts until they reach 18 (or whatever the state law is for majority age). But they can own stock that they have received by gift or inheritance and may have all rights, including voting rights, with regard to that stock. If the minor has the voting rights then the minor could give a parent the proxy to vote those shares (provided proxy voting is allowed).
If you're in California ... If you're incorporated in California, take a look at Cal. Corporations Code Sec. 702 (d) which provides that shares standing in the name of a minor may be voted by proxy unless a guardian of the minor's property has been appointed and written notice of such appointment is given to the corporation.
Another possibility. If the stock is held in a custodial account under the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act or there is some other trust or fiduciary account set up, then the custodian or trustee or other fiduciary would have the voting rights for the stock. As you may be aware, parents often give stock to children under the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act. This allows the donor/parent to give the stock to the minor but the stock is held in a custodial account where the custodian (who can be the donor/parent) controls the account until the child reaches the age of majority. A custodian of stock held in accordance with the Act has sole voting authority over the stock held in the account.

Can an Inventor Ditch Her Investors?

Dear Rich: I entered into a corporate agreement with someone who had a patent pending idea. After a year of back and forth, we finally started a corporation in February 2010. In total we spent 1 year talking about creating a corporation together and 1.5 years involved in the corporation; she always kept meeting the next big investor at the club where she worked and would drop me until the investor lost interest. As per our agreement, she was to bring the patent into the corporation and I was to bring the business management and necessary prototyping funding. In the agreement, I was getting 38% of the company, she was getting the remainder. At the this point, the patent is close to being finalized, the trademark and slogan are now done, and the prototyping is virtually done. Unfortunately, she now wants to terminate the agreement and is going around me and telling the patent attorney and others not to speak with me. Her certified termination letter to me states nothing in regard to the amount of time, money, and work I have put into our company. We have a corporation formed with an operating agreement clearly indicating our roles and percentages. She now has amnesia and says she never agreed to give me part of the patent even though she has the original contract and corporate operating agreement. Ideally, I feel she has defaulted from the agreement and loses any rights whatsoever on the patent. This would have been the case had done something similar; I would lose my investment, work, time, and ownership if I defaulted and acted unethically behind her back. How should I best handle this situation? What would happen to one of the entrepreneurs on Shark Tank if they tried to do this to one of the Sharks? Please don't ask the Dear Rich Staff hypothetical questions about reality TV shows. We're not equipped to answer. It's not so much that we're old and out of touch (which is true), it's just that after the first season of Survivor -- the one where Susan and Richard got on each other's nerves ("Your inability to admit your failures without going into a whiney speech makes you a bit of a loser in life ...") -- we decided that the human race had created a fork in the road and we would take the path without reality TV.
Right, you had a question. The resolution of your problem depends on two things: your paperwork and the amount of money each party is willing to spend on a legal battle. Your lawyer needs to review the initial agreement, the corporate formation documents, and hopefully, if there is one, the assignment of patent rights. Even if there is no assignment to the corporation, your lawyer may still be able to force the transfer of rights (or at least a financial judgment tied to the value of the patent) if the remaining paperwork conclusively proves that the inventor was going to hand over the invention. In any case, based on the facts in your letter, it appears as if this matter is headed for some legal martial arts so we urge you to see an attorney ASAP.
Alternative courses of action. If you have an arbitration clause in your agreement, that may enable you to resolve the matter quicker, or you could always ask for arbitration if the inventor is willing to agree. More importantly, have you evaluated the patent's commercial potential? We know that you believe in the patent so much so that you're willing to fight about it, but the objectivity of a third-party evaluation my save you a lot of time and effort. As you may be aware, it's estimated that 50% of patent applications     never become patents and of those that do get issued, less than 2% are commercialized (offered for sale). (We're not sure how reliable these statistics are but they give you an idea.) In other words if the idea is uncommercial, its possible that your inventor friend is offering you a chance to walk away from your obligations without any more risk or investment. That may be a better choice than being trapped in a reality TV show with your so-called "partner."

Wants to Invest in a Band

Dear Rich: Myself and a partner are considering investing in a band. The band is pretty far along, playing 2000 seat venues, recording their first cd, and seemingly taking success very seriously. They need funds to go to the next level and we are comfortable getting involved. However, the zillions of music industry contracts/guides out there do not touch on contracts protecting an investor buying a percentage of the band's entire business. Can you steer me toward something like this? I am looking for specific contract templates, along with what-to-watch-out-for insight. Investing in a band is the same as investing in any other business (which is why you're probably not finding paperwork specifically geared to bands). So lets take a look at the three things required to invest in a business: (1) a formal business entity -- that is the band must be a partnership, LLC, or corporation (preferably one of the latter two), and (2) an agreement between the owners of the entity formalizing your investment (for example, a stock agreement), and (3) some knowledge of the industry in which you are investing.
LLC or corporation. We recommend that the band form an LLC or corporation because investors in those entities have limited liability. That way investors will be shielded if the band throws a TV out of their hotel window and it lands on someone's Ferrari. These entities are also better suited for making investments than a partnership. There are plenty of self help books and forms, and online programs that explain how to form and invest in LLCs and corporations, though our hearts are with the Nolo products (insert FTC disclaimer, here).
Why it matters that you learn about the industry. Every industry has its quirks and the music industry has more than most. You should take a basic primer in music copyrights and trademarks because the assets of the band are concentrated in those intangibles. You'll probably want the songwriters in the band to contribute their songwriting copyrights to the band entity. However, that's not something they're obligated to do. So, before you drop your money into the band's piggy bank, you should probably be sure that the assets placed into the entity, reflect the money-making features of the band. And of course, it's probably in everyone's best interests for you and your partner to have your own attorney and the band to have different representation. That will go a long way to prevent a post-breakup challenge to the agreement.

Accused of Selling Knockoffs: What If I Do Nothing?

Dear Rich: I buy handbags from an importer and resell them online. I advertise them as knockoffs at various sites, including eBay. I never claim they're originals ... I always tell people they're copies. Recently, I got a letter from a lawyer saying I had to stop selling them or I would get sued.  Would I be better off running my business as a corporation so that I won't be personally liable? What will happen if I don't respond to the letter? Sorry, but the Dear Rich Staff has lost its ability to predict the future. (We think it happened when Google implemented Panda One and switched its search algorithm.) In any case, any of the following scenarios are possible after receiving a cease and desist letter:

• you keep selling the knockoffs, the lawyer files a lawsuit, gets a default judgment and enforces it against you personally (assuming you're not an LLC or incorporated) or against your business
• you stop selling the knockoffs, the lawyer drops the whole thing
• you stop selling, the lawyer sends a second letter, gets no response and files a lawsuit and gets a default judgment. 
• you blow off the letter, keep selling the knockoffs, and the lawyer is impressed with your moxie, and decides to hire you as an investigator of trademark counterfeiting. You do really well in that position, give up your handbag business and eventually write a book about the knockoff industry. 

Actually, the last choice --the Catch Me If You Can approach -- isn't very probable at all. If you continue to sell without either fighting the letter or otherwise responding, the lawyers will most likely pursue you because, as the young people say, that's how they roll.

Does forming an LCC or corporation shield you from these lawsuits? Converting your business to an LLC or corporation can establish limited liability and will shield you from personal liability in some instances -- the lawyers can only go after your business assets. But your liability is likely to be tied to your status at the time of the infringement. So if you're a sole proprietor when you got the letter, then you're probably going to be treated that way (personally liable) in court, as well, even if you later convert to an LLC or corporation. In addition, keep in mind that the LLC/corporate shield also won't protect you from the following:

• You personally guarantee a loan or lease.
• You owe federal or state taxes. 
• You act negligently (people are injured by your handbags).
• You fail to abide by corporate rules. 

That Said Dept. That said, perhaps you should reconsider your business model (as well as your business entity). First, you need to determine whether the lawyers are right -- that is, are your bags infringing? If yes, you should abandon the infringing items. If you're not infringing, you should consider whether you want to fight or move on. If you fight, you may be able to have some luck fighting takedown notices (we'll talk about them more this week) but keep in mind that if you're dragged into court, you'll be hit hard in your bankroll and the only guaranteed winners will be the lawyers.