Legal Definitions

[Mrs. Gooch]

I would like some actual lawyers (or someone adjacent to a lawyer) to tell me the legal definition of some words.

"from time to time"

"majority"


TIA.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Majority = one more than half

Duh

[Mrs. Gooch]

Majority = one more than half

Duh

Thank you, I agree.

[Rage Against the McKee]

from Black's Law Dictionary

MAJORITY
Full age; the age at which, by law, a person is entitled to the manage- ment of his own affairs and to the enjoyment of civic rights. The opposite of minority. Also the status of a person who is a major in age. In the law of elections, majority signifies the greater number of votes. When there are only two candidates, he who receives the greater number of the votes cast is said to have a majority; when there are more than two competitors for the same office, the person who receives the greatest number of votes has a plurality, but he has not a majority unless he receives a greater number of votes than those cast for all his competitors combined. In military affairs, majority denotes the rank and commission of a major. Majus dignnm trahit ad se minus dignum. The more worthy draws to itself the less worthy. Co. Litt. 43, 355b; Bract fol. 175; Noy, Max. p. 6, max. 18.

[Mrs. Gooch]

OK, let's expand on the voting definition of majority.

Consider this sentence in a set of bylaws: "The vote of the majority of the members having voting power present in person or represented by proxy shall decide any issue brought before a properly called meeting..."

Now, consider that a vote results in a tie. Do you need to do a tie-breaker?

[Rage Against the McKee]

OK, let's expand on the voting definition of majority.

Consider this sentence in a set of bylaws: "The vote of the majority of the members having voting power present in person or represented by proxy shall decide any issue brought before a properly called meeting..."

Now, consider that a vote results in a tie. Do you need to do a tie-breaker?

The motion fails in the event of a tie. Most boards have the chairman reserve his/her vote and only use it to break ties, though.

[Mrs. Gooch]

OK, let's expand on the voting definition of majority.

Consider this sentence in a set of bylaws: "The vote of the majority of the members having voting power present in person or represented by proxy shall decide any issue brought before a properly called meeting..."

Now, consider that a vote results in a tie. Do you need to do a tie-breaker?

The motion fails in the event of a tie. Most boards have the chairman reserve his/her vote and only use it to break ties, though.

Well in my example, the "chairperson" is included in the tie.

[Rage Against the McKee]

OK, let's expand on the voting definition of majority.

Consider this sentence in a set of bylaws: "The vote of the majority of the members having voting power present in person or represented by proxy shall decide any issue brought before a properly called meeting..."

Now, consider that a vote results in a tie. Do you need to do a tie-breaker?

The motion fails in the event of a tie. Most boards have the chairman reserve his/her vote and only use it to break ties, though.

Well in my example, the "chairperson" is included in the tie.

Motion fails

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

An LLC doesn't have a board or chairman unless specifically provided for in the OA. The members vote their interests, and you need 50%+ of membership interests for it to pass. 50% is not enough. It would be highly unusual to calculate on a per voting person basis.

[Mrs. Gooch]

An LLC doesn't have a board or chairman unless specifically provided for in the OA. The members vote their interests, and you need 50%+ of membership interests for it to pass. 50% is not enough. It would be highly unusual to calculate on a per voting person basis.

The organization in question has members with 1 vote each.

[Dugout DickStone]

I'd say coin flip

[Mrs. Gooch]

I'd say coin flip

Then you are saying that a tie vote does need a tie-breaker.

[Rage Against the McKee]

You don't need a tiebreaker because the bylaws require a majority. A tie is less than a majority, so the vote fails.

[Mrs. Gooch]

You don't need a tiebreaker because the bylaws require a majority. A tie is less than a majority, so the vote fails.

Yes, I agree with this, although some people I am dealing with do not.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

An LLC does not have bylaws, it has an OA (opetating agreememt).

[Mrs. Gooch]

An LLC does not have bylaws, it has an OA (opetating agreememt).

Did I ever say we are talking about an LLC?

[Dugout DickStone]

Well what does it say in the opetating agreement?

[meow meow]

Well what does it say in the opetating agreement?

think you meant opetating agreememt

[Mrs. Gooch]

The opetating agreement refers to the Bylaws.

[Rage Against the McKee]

The only case I can see where you would need to break the tie would be something like an election of officers.

[Mrs. Gooch]

The only case I can see where you would need to break the tie would be something like an election of officers.

The motion in question was not an election but that is an interesting aside about what to do in such a case....

[Spracne]

So, it's a corporation, right?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[star seed 7]

Is this hoa related?

[Mrs. Gooch]

It is a Not For Profit corporation. Not HOA... that could be a later thread.

[Spracne]

Why not just convene another meeting and revote? Or is this a case where there are like 2 or 4 vote holders and no one is gonna change their mind?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk