News & Analysis as of

California › Shareholder Litigation › Fiduciary Duty

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Court of Appeal Holds That Derivative Litigation Settlement Procedural Rules Apply Even In Intra-Shareholder Suits in...

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

In Norman v. Strateman, No. A170356, 2025 WL 1802786 (Cal. App., 1st Dist., June 20, 2025), the California Court of Appeal held that a settlement of derivative claims reached among all shareholders of a close corporation was...more

Allen Matkins

Just What Are The Duties Of A Controlling Shareholder And How Should Claims Of Breach Be Brought?

Allen Matkins on

In a recent post, Professor Stephen Bainbridge discusses the question of when a controlling shareholder owes fiduciary duties to minority shareholders.  Knowing when controlling shareholder owes fiduciary duties is one thing,...more

Allen Matkins

Court of Appeal Applies Caremark/Marchand To Directors of a California Corporation But The Result May Surprise You

Allen Matkins on

Over the years, I have commented on the fact that the California Court of Appeal has yet to apply In re Caremark International Inc., 698 A.2d 959 (Del. Ch. 1996) to the directors of a California corporation. Last Friday,...more

Allen Matkins

The General Corporation Law's Filioque

Allen Matkins on

The Nicene Creed as approved by the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D. included the following: "τὸ ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορευόμενον (who proceeds from the father).  About 200 years later at the Third Council of Toledo, the...more

Allen Matkins

A First Sighting Of Zuckerberg Decision In California

Allen Matkins on

Last year, the Delaware Supreme Court adopted a tripartite test for assessing demand futility allegations in derivative actions. United Food & Commercial Workers Union v. Zuckerberg 262 A.3d 1034 (Del. 2021). Under this...more

Allen Matkins

"Disinterested" May Be Pretermitted In Delaware But Not In California

Allen Matkins on

In this post, Professor Stephen Bainbridge posits that the Delaware Supreme Court incorrectly decided Fliegler v. Lawrence, 361 A.2d 218 (Del. 1976) by requiring that stockholder approval of conflicted transaction requires a...more

Allen Matkins

Why California Requires Notice Of Rights That Shareholders May Not Have

Allen Matkins on

Dissenters' rights under California's General Corporation Law do not exist unless there are "dissenting shares", a term defined in Section 1300(b) of the California Corporations Code.  In order to qualify as "dissenting...more

Allen Matkins

Why California Law Applies To Dividends Made By A Delaware Corporation (And Not To Some California Corporations)

Allen Matkins on

Corporations incorporated under California's General Corporation Law are subject to the limitations on distributions set forth in Chapter 5 of that law.   A foreign corporation may also be subject to Chapter 5 by virtue of...more

Allen Matkins

Court Finds No Cause Of Action Against Officer For Interfering With Shareholder Inspection

Allen Matkins on

William Romanowski is a former NFL linebacker who later became the majority shareholder, director, and "public face" of Nutrition 53, Inc.  When the company's second largest shareholder was allegedly denied inspection of the...more

9 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide