MinnLawyer Blog

Our national sister publication, Lawyers USA, reports on a highly unusual case out of Texas in which the judge added $20 million to a jury’s $65 million advisory award. The case was brought by Balkrishna Shagrithaya, who claimed his partner/ fellow entrepreneur (who laso happened to be the majority shareholder) squeezed him out of the multi-million-dollar software company they both founded. Shagrithaya brought the action as an oppressed minority shareholder.

A $65 million verdict in a lawsuit between two business partners that was rendered in October 2009 has been given a boost by the trial judge, who added $20 million to the jury’s award.

The case involved a dispute between two entrepreneurs who started a software company together with $1,000 that quickly grew into a multi-million dollar company sitting on loads of cash.

The plaintiff, Balkrishna Shagrithaya, a 47-percent minority owner in the company, alleged that his partner, Max Martin, the majority owner, slashed his salary unilaterally and attempted to phase him out of the company. Shagrithaya sued to force a dividend payout, arguing he was an oppressed minority shareholder.

The jury decided the company should pay a $65 million dividend, of which the plaintiff would have been entitled to $30.6 million.

The cause of action for “oppressed minority shareholder” provides equitable relief, so the jury’s award was merely advisory.

On March 31, the trial judge, Lorraine Raggio of the Texas 162nd Judicial District Court, issued a final judgment that added $20 million to the jury’s award, requiring the company to pay a $85 million dividend that ups the plaintiff’s 47 percent take to $40 million.