A recent letter ruling from the Court of Chancery on a nuance of the law of advancement deserves to be remembered. The Court’s decision in Day v. Diligence, Inc., C.A. No. 2020-0076-SG (Del. Ch. May 7, 2020), is short but important due to its clarification of a finer point regarding the duty of a company
Section 145(e)
Chancery Denied Advancement Claim as Within Board’s Discretion
By Francis Pileggi on
Posted in Court of Chancery Updates
Miller v. Palladium Industries, Inc., C.A. No. 7475-VCN (Del. Ch. Dec. 31, 2012).
Issue Addressed: This case addressed the issue of advancement of legal fees pursuant to Section 145(e) of the Delaware General Corporation Law.
Brief Overview
The Court denied a motion for judgment on the pleadings based on a claim for advancement…