Eric Moses and Tanya Sullivan are lifelong friends and business partners. Over the years, the two have owned and operated numerous small businesses in the food service and hospitality industries. Unfortunately, their relationship has soured. Last year, Tonya sued Eric in connection with the affairs of the Irish Pint, a Florida partnership formed for purposes of operating a pub in Winter Garden, Florida. Tanya prevailed in litigation and obtained a $1,200,000 judgment against Eric. Eric does not have enough cash or other personal assets to satisfy the judgment.

Meanwhile, Eric and Tanya are shareholders in Florida Cold-Pressed, Inc. ("FCP"), a Florida corporation that manufacturers and sells cold-pressed citrus juices. Eric owns 55% of FCP's outstanding shares. Besides Eric and Tanya, there are three (3) other FCP shareholders. FCP is a profitable enterprise, but Eric has repeatedly used his control of the company to vote against the issuance of any dividends to shareholders. Tanya sues Eric for breach of the fiduciary duty of utmost good faith and loyalty, alleging that Eric repeatedly voted against issuing dividends because his share of the dividends would likely be swallowed by Tanya's $1,200,000 judgment. In other words, Tanya believes that Eric doesn't want FCP to pay dividends because he is trying to avoid paying Tanya's judgment.

Assume that a state court judge agrees with Tanya that Eric has breached the duty of utmost good faith and loyalty to Tanya by engaging in some oppressive conduct as a shareholder of FCP. What result?

Group of answer choices

A. Since Eric breached his fiduciary duty of utmost good faith and loyalty, he will be required to pay damages to Tanya.

B. Eric does not owe fiduciary duties to Tanya; therefore, the judge's determination will be overturned on appeal.

C. Eric must show a legitimate business purpose (or corporate purpose) for his refusal to permit the issuance of dividends.

D. Eric must purchase all of Tanya's FCP shares.