1974SSRN Electronic JournalOpen access

Close Corporations and the Kansas General Corporation Code of 1972

Edwin W. Hecker

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

It has become a truism that within the genus of corporation there are at least two species -- the publicly-held corporation and the closely-held corporation -- and that the characteristics and requirements of a close corporation often are more akin to those of a partnership than to those of a public corporation. It is also common knowledge that in the past corporate legislation was drafted solely with the public corporation in mind and thus failed to take account of the peculiar characteristics and needs of the close corporation. As a result, the close corporation became a square peg sought to be forced into a round hold. A free and independent board of directors, necessary for the protection of inactive investors in a public corporation, was an anathema to the close corporation in which all of the stakeholders were engaged in active conduct of the business.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

It has become a truism that within the genus of corporation there are at least two species -- the publicly-held corporation and the closely-held corporation -- and that the characteristics and requirements of a close corporation often are more akin to those of a partnership than to those of a public corporation. It is also common knowledge that in the past corporate legislation was drafted solely with the public corporation in mind and thus failed to take account of the peculiar characteristics and needs of the close corporation. As a result, the close corporation became a square peg sought to be forced into a round hold. A free and independent board of directors, necessary for the protection of inactive investors in a public corporation, was an anathema to the close corporation in which all of the stakeholders were engaged in active conduct of the business.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

It has become a truism that within the genus of corporation there are at least two species -- the publicly-held corporation and the closely-held corporation -- and that the characteristics and requirements of a close corporation often are more akin to those of a partnership than to those of a public corporation. It is also common knowledge that in the past corporate legislation was drafted solely with the public corporation in mind and thus failed to take account of the peculiar characteristics and needs of the close corporation. As a result, the close corporation became a square peg sought to be forced into a round hold. A free and independent board of directors, necessary for the protection of inactive investors in a public corporation, was an anathema to the close corporation in which all of the stakeholders were engaged in active conduct of the business.

Key concepts: Corporation, General partnership, Legislation, Business, Corporate law, Management, Law, Political science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Close Corporations and the Kansas General Corporation Code of 1972 — Research Paper | ScholarLens