Shareholder Property rights in an S Corp.

[justalayman]

You only brought up the fact that an S-corp is allowed to distribute property because you wanted to disagree with me and had nothing else to pick at on this thread. Please stop, you are doing a disservice to the posters.

You are the one assuming the other shareholders claim is invalid with no proof. I and Quincy have taken a “I don’t know” position. The other shareholder believes his claim is valid and on first review apparently a court sees enough in the claim to halt demolition. Time will tell who is correct but it won’t be determined by those here.

 

[quincy]

Exactly, justalayman!

We do not have nearly enough facts to say anything definitively. A court will look at the facts as they are presented by the parties involved and make a determination based on these facts (and not on "odds" that the S Corps acted in a certain way).

 

[LdiJ]

What I said and I presume Quincy intended was to clarify that the Corp CAN distribute property to an individual. Apparently the other party believes somewhere and somehow that is what has happened. Whether it has or not is something the op and Corp and whoever needs to know will have to discover through the current court action.

Nobody here knows the terms of the financials of the Corp and it’s shareholders. That is something the op and all those involved will figure out in court.

The OP did not even remotely suggest that something like that happened. The OP suggested that the other party believes that they have ownership rights via their shares in the S-corp. You and quincy could have sent the OP off in a direction that was totally inappropriate for the situation based on the way that quincy did NOT explain his statement.

The home is either in the name of the S-corp or the names of the parties and therefore unconnected with the S-corp. It cannot be both ways.

I stand by my previous statements.

 

[justalayman]

The OP did not even remotely suggest that something like that happened. The OP suggested that the other party believes that they have ownership rights via their shares in the S-corp. You and quincy could have sent the OP off in a direction that was totally inappropriate for the situation based on the way that quincy did NOT explain his statement.

The home is either in the name of the S-corp or the names of the parties and therefore unconnected with the S-corp. It cannot be both ways.

I stand by my previous statements.

Well you’ll be standing all alone

While op didn’t say what I suggested, he also didn’t say it wasn’t as I suggested.

It’s an unknown but apparently the court put enough weight into the claim they ordered the demo be stopped until it can be dealt with. The only direction I or Quincy sent the guy was to show up to court and see what a judge says. If op acted on your advice he could make a lot of trouble for himself if there is any substance to the other guys claims. On top of that op doesn’t really have any option but to go to court since it’s already in the courts.

The home is either in the name of the S-corp or the names of the parties and therefore unconnected with the S-corp. It cannot be both ways.

well, this is where you are very very wrong. First your statement precludes a co tenancy. Surely you don’t really mean there can’t be a cotenancy with the Corp and some other entity, do you? To suggest any Corp must be the sole owner of any property they hold an interest in is just wrong.

Then, how do you know that part of the dividends aren’t an ownership interest in the title of the property or part of the other guys compensation isn’t an interest in the real property?


The fact is there is so little known here that nothing can be answered definitively. Are there answers that are more likely than others? Sure and based on the most common situations the other guy is wrong BUT that doesn’t mean he is in this particular situation. You denying there is any possibility but whatyou think is happening is what is sending the guy down the wrong path. He needs to understand your thoughts on the matter are not the only possibility.

 

[quincy]

Again, the answers to Barry's questions will require a personal review. Guessing is not helpful.