Here is Part III of a series by Professor Stephen Bainbridge on the demand requirement in derivative litigation. Parts I and II are available at this link. The first part dealt with the analysis applied to determine when demand is excused and when it is not. Part II dealt with the situation where demand is not excused. Part III addresses the situation where demand is excused and the company still tries to wrest control of the litigation via a Special Litigation Committee. Great stuff for anyone interested in this area of corporate litigation.
UPDATE: Here is a recent decision by a trial court in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, in LeMenestrel v. Warden, applying the ALI Principles related to the independence of a Special Litigation Committee and rejecting the claim that the SLC was not independent because it was "attorney-controlled". Hat tip to Francis J. Catania of Media, Delaware County, PA.