3 ms·
I don’t follow. You’re saying PPUs granted by the for-profit don’t carry a reasonably expected benefit? And that a parent can’t tortuously interfere with a subs
by junofan 3y ago
I don’t follow. You’re saying PPUs granted by the for-profit don’t carry a reasonably expected benefit? And that a parent can’t tortuously interfere with a subsidiary? Both are factually untrue. I don’t see the wiggle room here that you do.
- dragonwriter 3y ago> I don’t follow. You’re saying PPUs granted by the for-profit don’t carry a reasonably expected benefit? Yes, a profit sharing claim in an LLC whose operating agreement explicitly says it will be operated for the charitable purpose of a controlling nonprofit and that profit will not be its guiding principle does not create a reasonable expectation that it will be managed for profit. Either the employees have that information disclosed, and there is no expectation, or it is concealed by the subsidiary employing them, in which case there might be a reasonable expectation, but its due to fraud by the subsidiary, not interference by the parent.
- junofan 3y agoIt doesn’t sound like either of us have all the facts. We’ll leave it at that.