CHAPTER 12 Mergers, Acquisitions, and Other Changes to the Corporate Structure 89
©2013 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part, except for use as permitted in a license distributed with a certain product or
service or otherwise on a password-protected website for classroom use.
set forth details concerning the corpora-
tion to be acquired, its financial structure,
and its assets and liabilities.
Entity Conversions
34. State statutes generally provide for the
conversion of corporations to noncorporate
entities and for the conversion of noncor-
porate entities to corporations. Conversions
generally require the consent of the owners
of each entity and the board of direc-
tors/managers of each entity.
35. Statutes also typically provide for domes-
tication, the procedure to change a corpo-
ration’s state of domicile. Domestication
generally requires the approval of the
board of directors and shareholders.
Amendment to Articles of Incorporation
36. When the information included in the
corporation’s articles of incorporation
changes, articles of amendment must be
filed with the secretary of state or other
appropriate state official.
37. Under most circumstances, amendments
to the articles of incorporation require the
consent of shareholders.
The Paralegal’s Role
38. Corporate paralegals are often very active
in every phase of corporate mergers and
acquisitions.
CASE BRIEFS
Celotex Corporation v. Pickett, 490 So. 2d 35,
55 ALR4th 157 (1985)
Purpose: This case demonstrates the im-
portance of the type of transaction chosen to
combine businesses. It emphasizes that in a
merger transaction, all debts, liabilities, and
duties of the merging corporation are trans-
ferred to the surviving corporation.
Cause of Action: Negligence and strict liability
Facts: This case is an appeal by petitioner of a
trial court decision awarding punitive damages
to respondent.
The Philip Carey Corporation was
formed in 1888 and merged with Glen Alden
Corporation in 1967. Thereafter, Philip Carey
merged with another Glen Alden subsidiary,
Briggs Manufacturing Company, and became
known as Panacon Corporation. Celotex pur-
chased Glen Adlen’s controlling interest in
1972 and later purchased the remaining shares
of Panacon and merged it into Celotex.
Respondent Leonard H. Pickett was
employed in a Jacksonville shipyard from
1965 through June 1968, where, as part of his
employment as an insulator of ships, he exten-
sively used Philip Carey asbestos cement.
Pickett developed severe lung problems due to
his exposure to asbestos. Pickett and his wife
sued, on the grounds of negligence and strict
liability, several defendants, including peti-
tioner as corporate successor to Philip Carey.
The jury, in addition to compensatory damag-
es of $500,000 to Pickett and $15,000 to his
wife, determined that Philip Carey’s conduct
warranted punitive damages of $100,000
against Celotex, its corporate successor.
Celotex admitted liability because of
the merger for the compensatory damages
awarded to the Picketts, but maintained that
the imposition of punitive damages against
Celotex, simply because it is the statutory suc-
cessor of Philip Carey, contravenes the pur-
pose of such damages in Florida.
Issue: Can punitive damages be awarded
against a successor corporation for the actions
of its predecessor?
Holding: Yes, the merger between Celotex
and Panacon provided that Celotex was to as-
sume all debts, liabilities, and duties of Pana-
con. When a corporation voluntarily chooses a
formal merger, it must take the “bad will”
along with the “goodwill.”
REVIEW QUESTIONS
1. What is the difference between a consoli-
dation and a merger?
A merger is a combination of two or
more corporations whereby one of the