BUSINESS LAW
Supreme Court of Alaska (2022)
Elza Bouhassira
In Pederson v. Arctic Slope Regional Corp., 517 P.3d 606 (Alaska 2022), the supreme court held that the stated purpose of an inspection request by a shareholder should be determined based on the totality of the written request. (Id. at 611). In this case, a shareholder sought to exercise his right to inspect a corporation’s books and records to ensure that the information in them was accurate. (Id. at 608). The shareholder and corporation negotiated informally, but could not come to an agreement as to the scope of the shareholder’s inspection right, and the shareholder filed suit for a violation of his right to inspection. (Id.). The lower court held that the shareholder did not adequately state that he “suspected shenanigans” in his request for inspection, and held for the corporation. (Id. at 610). The supreme court reversed in part the lower court’s decision, reasoning that all of a written request must be considered when determining if a stated purpose is sufficient for approving an inspection request. (Id. at 611). The supreme court affirmed in part the lower court’s decision, reasoning that sanctions against the shareholder for failing to appear at scheduled deposition and failure to respond to discovery requests should stand. (Id. at 612). Reversing in part and affirming in part the lower court’s decision, the supreme court held that the stated purpose of an inspection request by a shareholder should be determined based on the totality of the written request. (Id. at 611).
