dispute in this case. If unfairness is found, however, it may be futile to require the minority shareholder to sue on behalf of the corporation when the only other shareholders are the two individual defendants, because any recovery in a derivative suit would return the funds to the control of defendant brothers, rather than to the injured party. In a large public corporation, the oppressed minority can sell her stock in order to extricate some of her invested capital. This market is not available for shares in a close corporation. The minority shareholders may be trapped in a disadvantaged situation. Donahue v. Rodd Electrotype Company of New England, Inc., 367 Mass. 578, 592, 328 N.E.2d 505 (1975); see In re Seagroatt Floral Co., 78 N.Y.2d 439, 576 N.Y.S.2d 831, 583 N.E.2d 287 (1991) (<HOLDING>); see also Robert B. Thompson, The
holding that fair market value was proper measure of damages for stock brokers breach of margin agreement caused by sale of plaintiffs shares without authorization noting that generally speaking fair market value is proper measure of damages for breach of contract relating to sale of goods which have an ascertamable value on the market recognizing that an ordered  buyout of stock at fair value is an appropriate remedy in a closely held corporation for the oppressive acts of the majority when there is no ready market for the corporations shares holding that chapter 8 of colorados ucc applied to the sale of shares in a corporation whose entire stock was held by one individual holding that omission of information about shares held in corporations was material even if the securities were worthless at the time holding in action for breach of contract caused by wrongful foreclosure and sale of shares of stock plaintiff was entitled to recover the fair market value of the stock at the time of its sale