A recent Delaware Court of Chancery opinion is required reading for those interested in the important distinction between corporate acts that are void as compared to voidable. In a 100-plus page decision in connection with approving a class action settlement and attorneys’ fees, the Court of Chancery engages in a deep doctrinal dive and scholarly

Louisiana Municipal Police Employees’ Retirement Systems v. Pyott, C.A. 5795-VCL (Del. Ch. June 11, 2012).

Issues Addressed

Whether collateral estoppel, Rule 23.1 or Rule 12(b)(6) apply to require the dismissal of a Delaware derivative suit based on the dismissal in California of a related derivative suit in which a federal court granted a Rule 23.1

Forsythe v. ESC Fund Management Co. (U.S.), Inc., C.A. No. 1091-VCL (Del. Ch. May 9, 2012).

Issue Addressed

Whether the settlement of a derivative action that the Court considered fair should be approved despite the objections of the named plaintiffs. 

Short Answer

The Court explained that the settlement could still be approved even if

Noteworthy 2011 Corporate and Commercial Decisions from Delaware’s Supreme Court and Court of Chancery.

By:  Francis G.X. Pileggi and Kevin F. Brady.

Introduction

This is the seventh year that we are providing an annual review of key Delaware corporate and commercial decisions. During 2011, we reviewed and summarized approximately 200 decisions from Delaware’s Supreme Court

In re Compellent Technologies, Inc. S’holder Litig., Del. Ch., Consol. C.A. No. 6084-VCL (Dec. 9, 2011).

This summary was prepared by an associate at Eckert Seamans.

Issue Addressed: Despite the length of this fifty-four page opinion, the only issue involved was the proper amount of attorneys’ fees. The Court noted that it has