Apple REIT Merger Vote Procedure Imposes Tight Deadlines and Tricky Provisions

Posted on February 6th, 2014 at 10:00 AM

From the Desk of Jim Eccleston at Eccleston Law Offices:

With the snowy winter, Apple REIT investors may be able to hunker down and read the 400 plus page merger document detailing the merger procedure and their rights. But just in case they do not, here are a few tips to keep in mind if you own Apple 7, Apple 8, or Apple 9:

 

1)      You must vote on or before February 21st;

2)      Voting yes is easy;

3)      But voting yes also means you lose your rights to demand an appraisal of your shares;

4)      There are good reasons to demand an appraisal; but

5)      You (quickly) must follow the procedures outlined in page 161 of your 400 page document.

The attorneys of Eccleston Law Offices represent investors and advisers nationwide in securities and employment matters. Our attorneys draw on a combined experience of nearly 50 years in delivering the highest quality legal services.

Related Attorneys: James J. Eccleston

Tags:

Return to Archive

TESTIMONIALS

Previous
Next

If you find yourself in trouble with the regulators, call Eccleston Law, you won't regret it.

Rick R.

LATEST NEWS AND ARTICLES

July 26, 2024
Kentucky Advisor Sues LPL Financial for Alleged Corporate Raid

A Kentucky advisor, Mark Lamkin, has filed a lawsuit against LPL Financial, claiming the independent broker-dealer orchestrated a corporate raid that resulted in the loss of his firm’s entire book of managed assets.

July 25, 2024
FINRA Plans Fee Increases Amid Rising Costs and Losses

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has announced plans to raise fees for its approximately 3,300 broker-dealer member firms. According to AdvisorHub, the self-regulator faces soaring costs, as detailed in its annual report published at the end of June.

July 24, 2024
Raymond James Settles with Oregon Over Excessive Commissions

Raymond James recently settled a case with Oregon's Division of Financial Regulation (“DFR”), agreeing to pay nearly $200,000 over allegations of charging excessive commissions to retail investors.