Altrust Financial Services, Inc. v. James R. Adams Dixon Hughes, Pllc v. James R. Adams James R. Adams v. Altrust…

Summary

The court affirmed dismissal of the shareholders’ Alabama Securities Act claim because the statute’s private remedy is limited to purchasers, while the plaintiffs alleged only that they retained their shares rather than selling them. It reversed the refusal to dismiss the fraudulent-suppression claim against the Altrust defendants and the professional-negligence claim against Dixon Hughes because the alleged loss was a diminution in share value arising from corporate mismanagement, making the claims derivative rather than direct. The court overruled prior precedent to the extent it permitted such shareholder claims without a unique, individualized injury. Justice Murdock, concurring in the result, agreed with the disposition but would have overruled that precedent only more narrowly and focused on causation.