Quote from: lurganblue on October 10, 2010, 06:20:43 PMdirectors have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the company( which in law is a seperate legal entity) which is what the 3 guys said they did, the crux of the matter is whether hicks and gillete had the authority to remove them prior to the directors meetingQuote from: Farrandeelin on October 10, 2010, 03:49:35 PM
Why are Hicks and Gillett bringing the board to court anyway? Surely they should accept the democratic decision of the board to sell to the Red Sox owner and make a bit of bob on the club? I'm not one who's well up on these things, I sometimes have to re-read the Glazer situation on Utd to find out how they operate as well.
I know very little about these things but are hicks and gillett not the majority stake holders and thus don't have to do anything they don't want too no matter how unpopular that is?