Court of Chancery Defines Illegal Vote Buying
Portnoy v. Cryo-Cell International Inc., C.A. No. 3142-VCS (January 15, 2008).
This is the definitive decision on when arrangements to secure a stockholder's vote are invalid. "Vote buying" has long been criticized without much thought. After all, the Delaware General Corporation Code specifically authorizes arrangements to lock up a stockholder's vote. However, paying for that vote seems somehow wrong, perhaps because of political reasons. Here, the court carefully sets out the policy considerations and decides when paying for a vote is invalid.
In general, when a stockholder's agreement to cast his vote for managment pursuant to a contract with the corporation is publicly announced, then it will be valid. If the other stockholders do not like it, then they can vote the other way. The exceptions to this are when corporate assets are used to buy the vote and then it becomes more troublesome. The arrangement will be struck down when it is not in furtherance of a proper corporate purpose and is unreasonable.
This decision also comments on how to conduct a stockholder meeting. Postponing votes by lying about why there is a delay is frowned upon, to say the least.
