I am not in Nevada, but I know that in the jurisdiction I practice in, the Courts have been pretty lenient in light of corporate compliance. But we are talking about things like holding electronic shareholder meetings when the bylaws require in person meetings, or holding a shareholder meeting in July when the bylaws require it to be held in April, and so on.
There is no question that for the first 4-6 months of this pandemic, we were scrambling to forge an unknown path. My experience was that if the changes you made were reasonable and kept up with the “spirit of the law”, that the Courts would let it go.
So the idea that the corporation might get some leeway due to COVID has merit. The question is how far does that leeway extend and at what point does the Court say that it is a fake excuse to cover up a bigger problem. To me, seven months of complete silence from the corporation is where that threshold was crossed.
