The Delaware Courts have issued many decisions over the last year regarding the ongoing litigation related to the hostile attempt by Air Products to acquire Airgas. See, e.g., blog summaries here. Next week, there will be another hearing in the Delaware Court of Chancery in this case on the issue of whether the poison pill should stay in place as a defense against the hostile takeover. Professor Stephen Bainbridge provides an insightful analysis here to support his prediction that the Court of Chancery will not act contrary to prevailing Delaware precedent, and will not invalidate the pill.

Professor Gordon Smith provides scholarly insights into other Airgas case developments here. There appears to be a split among the members of the Airgas board regarding the "minimum price" or the price that would be acceptable for a sale of the company. This latest iteration of the dispute also tees up a classic battle for primacy between shareholders and directors in connection with who should decide whether the company should be sold.