Search Site
Office Location :  3200 North Central Avenue, Suite 2500, Phoenix, Arizona 85012
We are open and ready to serve you.
We offer video, phone and email consultations. Litigation and transactions work can be done remotely. You never need to come to the office.
Click Here to Learn More on Covid-19, Contracts and Defenses
Free Case Intake and Evaluation 866-696-2033
Corporation Governance: Meetings and Voting

Corporation Governance: Meetings and Voting

Control of a corporation is exercised through its board of directors. Shareholders in turn elect the directors. In addition to straight voting of one vote per share, there are several methods provided by statute or corporate charter for calculating shareholder votes, including cumulative, class, weighted and supermajority voting.

Cumulative Voting

With straight voting, each share is entitled to one vote per director being elected. Thus, fifty percent plus one of the corporation’s outstanding shares will elect each director. Cumulative voting allows a shareholder to accumulate his or her votes for all directors and to cast those votes for just one or fewer than all of the directors. As a result, the owners of a majority of the shares are likely to elect the majority of the directors but not all of the directors if shareholders in the minority decide to accumulate their votes and cast them for a particular director.

Proponents of cumulative voting suggest that the procedure may result in a more representative board of directors. Opponents of cumulative voting are concerned that directors elected by a minority may seek to protect minority interests at the expense of the interests of the corporation to which the directors owe a fiduciary duty.

One mechanism for counterbalancing the effects of cumulative voting is to stagger the elections of members of the board of directors so that directors have multi-year terms and only some of the directors are elected each year. With cumulative voting, the chance of a minority electing a director increases as the number of directors to be elected increases. With staggered elections, only a half or third (or otherwise, depending on how the elections are staggered) of the directors are elected at any one time and the chance of minority stockholders electing directors is decreased.

Class Voting

To insure particular levels of representation in the voting for directors, shares may be divided into classes with numerous possible variations on the power of each class to vote for directors. For example, each class may be provided with the power to elect one or more directors, or classes could be set up that would vary according to what rights they have to receive dividends or vote for directors.

Weighted Voting

While as a rule, each share of stock is considered to have one vote, provision may be made in corporate charters for the issuance of shares with more or less than one vote when compared to other shares issued by the corporation. A particular state’s corporation law or case law would determine whether it would be permissible to provide for shares with more than one vote each without also requiring a proportionately increased investment in the corporation by the purchaser of such shares.

Supermajority Voting

Charters may contain a provision that approval of certain actions by the corporation must take place through more than a majority of the votes of directors or shareholders. Such a provision would counter the traditional concept that any action needs only the majority of votes cast for it. For example, the specific act of agreeing to a merger with another company could be conditioned on approval by most or all of the shareholders rather than a majority of the shareholders in order to deter hostile takeovers.

Copyright 2012 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc.

What others are saying about us
  • "I would recommend Mr. Hudspeth unequivocally. Not only is he an outstanding business attorney, he also provided me with access to a divorce attorney. Thanks to his skill, and resources available outside the Phoenix law family, I was successful in challenging a “family law” mediation that was particularly and grossly unfair." - Chandler, Arizona Private Individual

  • "Thank you for the work you have done in creating these documents. It is always a pleasure dealing with this firm!" - J. P.

  • "An excellent response. Masterfully prepared. Thank you." - El Paso, Texas Real Estate Investor

  • "Glad about meeting with Don. Felt so much better, better than in 15 years. Really appreciated the conversation." - RH, Phoenix Manufacturing Company

Donald W. Hudspeth Attorney Photo
Donald W. Hudspeth
Principal Attorney

Attorney Donald W. Hudspeth has more than twenty years’ experience practicing corporate and business law. Before attending law school, Mr. Hudspeth held a stock brokers license at the age of 21 and owned his own business at the age of 23. He was a business law professor at Arizona State University, West Campus, and has conducted classes and seminars for a number of higher institutions and organizations. Mr. Hudspeth has published two books on law and is the founder of the radio programs Law on the Edge and Law Talk.

Brian K. Stanley Attorney Photo
Brian K. Stanley
Of Counsel

Attorney Brian K. Stanley has more than thirty years' experience practicing corporate and business law. Brian also worked for Sandra Day O'Connor in 1976-1977; Formerly with the Phoenix firm of Jones, Hunter & Lerch as of the dissolution of that firm in 1979. (Also Member, Law Office of Brian K. Stanley, PLLC).

Janae A. Perry-Meier Attorney Photo
Janae A. Perry-Meier

Janae Perry-Meier is a business and commercial law attorney focusing on international business. Janae handles both transactional and litigation matters, including: forming your business, drafting your contracts, franchising, business disputes, business divorce, mergers and acquisitions, private placements, securities compliance, and corporate governance. Janae also handles trademark registration, office action responses, and infringement cases.

Michael David Malin Attorney Photo
Michael David Malin

Michael Malin has been a practicing attorney in Arizona since 2013. He has represented clients through all stages of litigation. Prior to joining the firm, Michael litigated cases involving professional negligence, insurance bad faith, dram shop liability, personal injury and wrongful death, Indian law, probate, and criminal matters. Before attending law school, he worked for several startup companies in the then-nascent field of smartphone and tablet application development. test

Robert J. McGee Attorney Photo
Robert J. McGee
Associate Attorney

Robert J. McGee is an Arizona native who has been practicing law since 2014. Robert’s primary experience is with all aspects of intellectual property – trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, and patents. Robert has substantial additional experience with cyberlaw. He is an avid collector of esoteric knowledge and always takes an interest in the details of how each client’s business works.

  • Preeminent AV Rated
    Client Distinction Award
    Bar Register
    AV Rating
    The Arizona Republic
  • Newsweek
    Arizona Sate University
    Top Rated Lawyers
    Client Champion
    McAfee Secure
  • Lawyers Of Distinction
    2020 issue of AZ Business Leaders

Our firm now offers a scholarship program for ASU first and second year law students.

The scholarship is awarded to students for academic merit with an interest in business and business law. Candidates may have majored in fields other than business, have taken a break between college and law school, or have had exceptional life experiences.

Pay Your Bill Online

Use our easy-to-use and secure online payment feature to pay your bill. We accept all major credit cards.

Pay Your Bill

Contact us

Quick Contact Form