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 Delaware Supreme Court recently affirmed a ruling that unique circumstances justified the denial of a dissident investor’s bid to compel a shareholder meeting and director election at Hawk

The Court of Chancery recently denied a request for attorneys’ fees that were sought pursuant to the corporate benefit doctrine despite a successful suit under Section 211 of the Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL) to compel a company to hold an annual meeting. In Martin v. Harbor Diversified, Inc., C.A. No. 2018-0762-SG (Del. Ch. Feb.

Rich v. Fuqi Int’l, Inc., C.A. No. 5653-VCG (Del. Ch. Nov. 5, 2012). 

Why this opinion is noteworthy: The Delaware Court of Chancery reaffirms in this pithy opinion that the Delaware General Corporation Law’s requirement in Section 211 that a shareholders’ meeting must be held annually, will not be suspended due to arguably conflicting

Key corporate and commercial decisions that we have highlighted, with commentary, over the last few months (roughly the 2nd and 3rd quarters of 2012), are compiled at the hyperlinks below for the convenience of our readers.

Supreme Court Upholds $2 Billion Judgment and $300 Million Fee Award

LP Member Protected from Self-Interested Transaction by Terms