Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Race to File Shareholder Derivative Suits in Delaware Slowed by Judicial Roadblock
In two recent opinions with wide-ranging practical implications for companies that are the target of shareholder derivative litigation, Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster of the Delaware Chancery Court issued a well-developed, scathing critique of the plaintiffs bar's “first-to-file” mentality in derivative suits. See La. Mun. Police Emps.' Ret. Sys. v. Pyott, C.A. No. 5795-VCL, 2012 WL 2087205, (hereinafter Allergan); South v. Baker, C.A. No. 7294-VCL, 2012 WL 4372538 at **14-15 (Del. Ch. Sept. 25, 2012) (hereinafter Hecla). In these opinions, Vice Chancellor Laster was particularly focused on the unseemly “race to the courthouse” by plaintiff lawyers seeking to act as fiduciaries for a company and its stockholders in the litigation. While these decisions are not likely to reduce the threat of shareholder derivative litigation against companies, they are likely to change how the cases are litigated, and provide companies with the ability to dispose of ill-conceived, plaintiff attorney-driven litigation at an early stage in the case.
Delaware courts have, for some time now, been insisting that plaintiffs seeking to file derivative litigation on behalf of a company against its own officers and directors first use 8 Del. C. ' 220 to request an opporunity to review relevant books and records of the corporation. These so-called “books-and-records” requests can provide a shareholder with the ability to conduct a limited pre-suit investigation in order to assess whether litigation is appropriate. See, e.g., Wood v. Baum, 953 A.2d 136, 144 (Del. 2008); Beam v. Stewart, 845 A.2d 1040, 1056-57 (Del. 2004); White v. Panic, 783 A.2d 543, 556-57 (Del. 2001); Brehm v. Eisner, 746 A.2d 244, 266-67 (Del. 2000); Grimes v. Donald, 623 A.2d 1207, 1216 (Del. 1996); In re Dow Chem. Co. Derivative Litig., No. 4349-CC, 2010 WL 66769 (Del. Ch. Jan. 11, 2010); Desimone v. Barrows, 924 A.2d 908, 951 (Del. Ch. 2007); Rattner v. Bidzos, No. Civ.A. 19700, 2003 WL 22284323, at *14 (Del. Ch. Sept. 30, 2003); Guttman v. Huang, 823 A.2d 492, 493 (Del. Ch. 2003). But the plaintiffs bar has simply not heeded the direction of the Delaware courts.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
New York's Latest Cybersecurity Commitment
On Aug. 9, 2023, Gov. Kathy Hochul introduced New York's inaugural comprehensive cybersecurity strategy. In sum, the plan aims to update government networks, bolster county-level digital defenses, and regulate critical infrastructure.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
How AI Has Affected PR
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.