When a business starts, most owners aren’t thinking about future fights. Optimism is high, everyone’s aligned, and handshake deals feel like enough. But as Judge Thomas Mulroy of Resolute Systems, Inc. puts it, “Shareholder disputes are exactly like a divorce.” They are legally difficult and incredibly emotional. These so-called ‘business divorces’ can arise from fraud, self-dealing, control struggles, or simply clashing visions for the future. Left unchecked, they can cripple even successful companies.
The good news? With the right planning and dispute-resolution tools, business owners can navigate these situations while minimizing damage to both relationships and enterprise value.
The single best defense against shareholder disputes? Strong agreements prepared at the outset.
As Janel Dressen of Anthony Ostlund Louwagie Dressen & Boylan notes: “Having documents in place is by far the best advice you can receive when you’re forming a business; if you don’t have them, you’ll spend tens, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars having the fight.”
Key documents include:
Well-drafted buy-sell agreements are especially important. They not only clarify valuation methods but also provide funding mechanisms to ensure buyouts can be paid.
“Sometimes it’s about lying, cheating, and stealing,” observes Dressen, “but most of the time, it’s really about control.”
Control disputes show up in many ways, including around:
At their core, disputes often stem from fiduciary duties. When those duties are breached, minority owners can be squeezed out, denied access to records, or locked out of profits. Many states recognize shareholder oppression as a legal claim in such cases, giving courts the power to compel buyouts or other remedies.
While many disputes circle back to money, trust and fairness generally lie at their core. Still, the resolution almost always requires figuring out a fair financial outcome. That means valuing the business which is a process that’s rarely straightforward. There are various approaches to valuation including the income, market, and asset-based methods.
Disagreements over which approach to use can swing valuations significantly. Because valuation is more art than science, experts on both sides often come back with dramatically different numbers. In fact, valuation experts often become central figures in dispute resolution. John Levitske of HKA highlights how contentious this can get: “There’s as much arguing over the value of a company, even with experts, as there is without the experts.”
For judges, this creates its own challenges. Fraud counts or emotional accusations can overshadow valuation, making it harder for courts to reach the fairest outcome. Some judges even appoint independent appraisers in large cases, though that option is costly and rare.
When disputes do arise, owners have several paths to resolution, including mediation, arbitration, and litigation.
Mediation is private, flexible, and less expensive, with a neutral third-party facilitating settlement talks. The downside? It’s non-binding unless parties sign an agreement. As Judge Mulroy advises, “The sooner you start to talk about your problems, the better chance you have of resolving them.”
Here, an arbitrator (or panel) makes a binding decision. It’s faster and more private than litigation, but comes with risks including limited appeals and the potential for uneven fairness. Arbitration can be especially useful when industry expertise is needed.
Litigation is the last resort. Here, courts can enforce decisions, order buyouts, or even dissolve a company. However, lawsuits are slow, expensive, and public, often damaging goodwill and company value along the way.
In shareholder litigation, fraud and oppression are recurring themes. Fraud can include misusing company funds, hiding material facts, or self-dealing. Fraud allegations often escalate tensions; they can trigger punitive damages, scare lenders, and spook customers. Oppression claims, meanwhile, typically involve majority shareholders freezing out minority shareholders by denying dividends, excluding them from management, or withholding information. Many states have statutes specifically protecting minority shareholders from such abuse.
As Judge Mulroy cautions, “You don’t want to turn your life into litigation. You want to go back to your business; that’s where you were happiest. Get this resolved as soon as possible by any means possible.”
Ultimately, most shareholder disputes end in a separation, or business divorce, where one side buys out the other. As Megan Becwar of Dispute Economics LLC warns, the longer disputes drag on, the more they damage the business: “Every bit of this dispute is causing a disruption, and the disruption is hurting the value of the business.”
While shareholder disputes can’t always be avoided, they can be anticipated, managed, and resolved in ways that preserve both business value and personal sanity by keeping the following in mind:
To learn more about this topic view Resolving Shareholder Disputes. The quoted remarks referenced in this article were made either during this webinar or shortly thereafter during post-webinar interviews with the panelists. Readers may also be interested to read other articles about litigation.
This article was originally published on September 2, 2025.
©2025. DailyDACTM, LLC d/b/a/ Financial PoiseTM. This article is subject to the disclaimers found here.
Financial Poise helps trusted advisors (accountants, attorneys, business brokers, consultants, financial advisors, investment bankers, etc.) by providing a meritocracy-based platform on which to demonstrate their thought leadership. The thought leadership of these advisors is expressed in the form of educational articles, so we can provide our readers high-quality, unbiased education about investing, owning a business…