Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Director behavior, shareholder protection, and corporate legal compliance

Article Abstract:

The Delaware Court of Chancery found in In re Caremark International, Inc. Derivative Litigation that directors do have an affirmative duty to monitor, find and correct misconduct by employees. In specific, the Court found that the defendants did not satisfy their duty to establish and maintain reporting systems to monitor compliance with the law. The ruling will provide shareholders with only limited protection because the reporting system duty only requires good faith effort on the part of directors and may shield them from liability.

Author: Funk, Stephen F.
Publisher: Widener University School of Law
Publication Name: Delaware Journal of Corporate Law
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0364-9490
Year: 1997
Board of Directors-Functions, Boards of directors

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Some reflections about the Disney case

Article Abstract:

In the case of Brehm v. Eisner, the Delaware Supreme Court decided that the board of directors of Walt Disney Co. did not breach their fiduciary duty in granting a contract with favorable termination benefits to its president Michael Ovitz. The court ruled that the board acted in good faith when accepting advice that Ovits's hiring would benefit the company.

Author: Korolev, Vladimir S.
Publisher: Widener University School of Law
Publication Name: Delaware Journal of Corporate Law
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0364-9490
Year: 2001
Labor contracts, Business judgment rule

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Fiduciary duties and disclosure obligations: resolving questrions after Malone v. Brincat

Article Abstract:

The author discusses the Delaware Supreme Court's ruling that stockholders may state a cause of action stemming from corporate director's mis-disclosure made in the absence of a request for stockholder action. Topics include the corporate officer's affirmative duty to disclose and the defenses available in duty-to-disclose cases.

Author: Barbera, Holly M.
Publisher: Widener University School of Law
Publication Name: Delaware Journal of Corporate Law
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0364-9490
Year: 2001
Disclosure statements (Accounting), Corporate anti-takeover measures, Antitakeover strategies

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Cases, Corporate directors, Stockholders' derivative actions, Shareholder lawsuits, Case Note, Delaware, Fiduciary duties
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: A macro-economic model providing patent valuation and patent based company financial indicators. The standard for the existence of an interference
  • Abstracts: Strategy, form, and corporate legal responsibility under the NLRA. Labor and employment laws in Mexico and the US: an international comparison
  • Abstracts: Director and advisor disinterestedness and independence under Delaware law. Conflict transactions
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.