This post was prepared by Frank Reynolds, who has been following Delaware corporate law, and writing about it for various legal publications, for over 30 years.
A shareholder who made a veiled threat to take action against a biopharmaceutical company over its directors’ allegedly excessive compensation effectively made a pre-suit demand and cannot later
This post was prepared by Frank Reynolds, who has been following Delaware corporate law, and writing about it for various legal publications, for over 30 years.
The business judgment rule cannot shield Clovis Oncology Inc.’s directors from shareholder charges that they breached their oversight duty by ignoring reports that their flagship cancer-fighting drug was
Over the last 14 years that I have published this blog, I have compiled an annual review with a list of key Delaware corporate and commercial decisions that have widespread utility to practitioners, especially those court decisions that are not widely covered by other legal publications or the mainstream press. On a few occasions, I
The Delaware Court of Chancery addressed a bevy of basic corporate litigation principles in the context of claims challenging the actions of directors, and determining which standards of review apply, and which procedural prerequisites need to be satisfied. In Carr v. New Enterprise Associates, Inc., C.A. No. 2017-0381-AGB (Del. Ch. Mar. 26, 2018), claims
An Eckert Seamans associate prepared this overview.
In the Delaware Court of Chancery decision captioned, In re Merge Healthcare Inc. S’holders Litig., C.A. No. 11388-VCG (Del. Ch. Jan. 30, 2017), Vice Chancellor Glasscock applied the business judgment rule and dismissed an action for failure to state fiduciary-related claims. This opinion is important because
Top Ten 2013 Delaware Corporate and Commercial Decisions
By: Francis G.X. Pileggi and Kevin F. Brady
This is our ninth annual review of key Delaware corporate and commercial decisions. During 2013, we reviewed and summarized over 200 decisions from Delaware’s Supreme Court and Court of Chancery on corporate and commercial issues. Among the decisions with
Sutherland v. Sutherland, C.A. No. 2399-VCN (Del. Ch. May 30, 2013).
Issue Addressed: Whether certain directors violated their fiduciary duties by benefiting from a system of charging for administrative expenses for personal matters that was more favorable to certain directors.
Short Answer: No.
Background: Many prior Delaware decisions in this long-running
Among the key corporate and commercial Delaware decisions that we have highlighted on these pages during the first five months of 2013, the following decisions either clarified existing Delaware law or announced new law on important substantive or procedural topics. This is a supplement to the annual review of cases we have provided on this
In Re MFW Shareholder Litigation, C.A. No. 6566-CS (Del. Ch. May 29, 2013).
Issue Addressed: What standard of review should apply to a going-private merger conditioned upfront by the controlling stockholder on approval by both a properly empowered, independent committee and an informed, uncoerced majority-of-the-minority vote.
Short Answer: When a controlling stockholder
In re Wayport, Inc. Litigation, Cons., C.A. No. 4167-VCL (Del. Ch. May 1, 2013).
Issues Addressed: Among the several issues addressed in this case, the most noteworthy is a fulsome discussion and restatement of the fiduciary duty of disclosure that directors and majority shareholders owe to other existing shareholders from whom they are