Kirby v. Sokol, et al., Del. Ch. No. 6392, is the caption of a lawsuit filed earlier this week in the Delaware Court of Chancery which arises out of the recent resignation of the heir apparent to the Oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffett, based on widely-reported allegations in the mainstream press and elsewhere that he used information acquired in his official capacity in order to benefit himself personally–all just allegations of course. In the 48 hours or so since the complaint (available here), was filed, learned commentary and other reporting about this high-profile corporate litigation has abounded. For example:

  • Professor Stephen Bainbridge, a valued friend of this blog and one of the nation’s most respected authorities on corporate law, provides erudite insights here into prior Delaware decisions that may apply to the claims that can be made against Mr. Sokol in connection with the allegations that he used information learned while working for Berkshire Hathaway for his own account. If nothing else, the good professor’s commentary about Delaware case law that may apply to an arguable state law claim for insider trading, provides a useful analysis that will surely be of interest to the corporate practitioner. The good professor provides a follow-up post here that examines the corporate opportunity doctrine more closely as it applies to this case. We are also grateful for the link to the quote by yours truly in Forbes.
  • Professor Larry Ribstein, another "nationally-ranked" legal scholar, opines on the issues raised in this matter here.
  • Peter Lattman writes on The New York Times DealBook Blog about the case here.
  • Francine McKenna, a widely read commentator on finance, accounting and the law, writes in her regular column for Forbes, about the allegations here. She notes that the complaint does not use the words "insider trading".  We appreciate the quote from yours truly in the column.
  • Reuters has a story about the new complaint here.