• HOME
  • SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
  • PROFILE
  • ALLEN MATKINS
  • CONTACT
Print Email Shortlink

When Is A Director’s Inspection Right Not Absolute?

By Keith Paul Bishop on June 21, 2010 in Corporate Governance

California Corporations Code Section 1602 provides that every director “shall have the absolute right at any reasonable time to inspect and copy all books, records and documents of every kind . . .”. While the statute seems to brook no exceptions, the California Court of Appeal last year held that a director can lose his “absolute” right of inspection if he was no longer disinterested and independent in the performance of his duties. Tritek Telecom, Inc. v. Superior Court, 169 Cal. App. 4th 1385 (2009). In that case, the director had filed a shareholder’s action against the corporation. Now, according to a more recent decision, Wolf v. CDS DEVCO, a director can also lose his or her right of inspection by ceasing to be a director. Incidentally, Allen Matkins represented the succesful defendants in the appeal of that case.   

Section 1602 is one of California’s many “outreach” statutes. It applies to foreign corporations that pass (or fail, depending on your point of view) the shareholder and business tests in California Corporations Code Section 2115. Regardless of whether these tests are met and even when the corporation is exempt under Section 2115, Section 1602 applies when the corporation has its principal executive office in Calfiornia or customarily holds its board meetings here. See my article:  Court of Appeal Applies California Inspection Rights To Delaware Corporation, 17 CEB California Business Law Reporter 168 (1996).

directorsinspection right
  • Related Stories
  • Most Popular
  • Court Holds Non-Parties May Enforce Arbitration Agreement Even Though The General Rule Is That They Can’t
  • Two Very Good Reasons To Visit The Department’s Website
  • Sealing A Contract May Mean Nothing Or 20 Years!
  • Ever Wonder What Money Is? California Has Some Answers And I Have Some Questions
  • Bitcoin And The Corporations Code
  • If You’re Relying On The Signature Of Two Officers, You May Want To Think Again
  • Conflict Minerals Bill In Suspense File (For Now)
  • Concurrent Jurisdiction Found For Covered Class Actions
  • Nevada Supreme Court Adopts Delaware Approach To Fair Value Burden Of Proof
  • SEC Proposes John Wilkes Booth Rules
  • If I Were A Carpenter, I’d Build A Better Proxy
  • CalPERS’ Annus Horribilis: How Much Worse Will It Get?
← Previous Next →

AUTHOR

Keith Paul Bishop
Partner
(949) 553-1313
kbishop@allenmatkins.com
CONTACT ME

RECOGNITION

NEWSLETTER

TOPICS

  • Accountants
  • Administrative Procedure
  • Attorney-Client Privilege/Work Product
  • Broker-Dealers
  • California Securities Laws
  • California Sui Generis
  • CalPERS/CalSTRS
  • Choice of Law/Conflict of Law
  • Corporate Governance
  • Department of Corporations
  • Derivative Suits
  • Enforcement & Investigations
  • Fairness Hearings
  • Finance Lenders
  • Financial Institutions
  • Investment Advisers
  • JOBS Act
  • Legislation
  • Limited Liability Companies
  • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Nevada Corporations
  • Non-Compete Agreements
  • Partnerships
  • Professional Responsibility
  • Pseudo-Foreign Corporations
  • Public Records Act/FOIA
  • Secretary of State
  • Securities Litigation
  • Uncategorized
  • Video

YOUTUBE

TWITTER

FACEBOOK

CALENDAR

June 2010
M T W T F S S
    Jul »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

Copyright © 2013 California Corporate & Securities Law.

Powered by WordPress and News.

  • follow:follow:
  • Become my Facebook friend Become my Facebook friend
  • Connect with me Connect with me
  • RSS RSS
  • Tweet with me Tweet with me