Caremark Issues Addressed in Recent Chancery Case

Posted on January 10, 2007 by Francis Pileggi

Recently, I cursorily blogged about the Chancery Court decision in Araneta of a few weeks ago, here. Prof. Gordon Smith provides a more scholarly analysis of the case and its Caremark aspects. Here is the link: Conglomerate Blog: Business, Law, Economics & Society

  • http://www.delawarelitigation.com/2006/12/articles/chancery-court-updates/directors-found-liable-for-not-stopping-majority-shareholders-conduct/index.html Delaware Corporate and Commercial Litigation Blog

    Directors Found Liable For Not Stopping Majority Shareholder’s Conduct

    In ATR-KIM ENG FINANCIAL CORPORATION v. ARANETA, (Del. Ch., December 21, 2006), 2006 WL 3783520, read opinion here, the Delaware Chancery Court found directors liable for acting as mere "tools" of the majority shareholder, (see footnote 129),…

  • http://www.delawarelitigation.com/2008/02/articles/commentary/are-caremark-duties-of-directors-real/index.html Delaware Corporate and Commercial Litigation Blog

    Are Caremark Duties of Directors Real?

    One corporate law professor argues that the landmark Delaware Chancery Court decision in 1996 of In Re Caremark, describing a director’s duty of oversight, was "dead upon enunciation" and it is really a Potemkin Village that never really resu…