How to Win and Still Lose: Delaware Court of Chancery’s Expanding Focus From Individual AI Misuse to Organizational Governance
A July 1, 2026 order from the Delaware Court of Chancery provides another insight into the risks of using generative artificial intelligence (“GenAI”) without adequate human review, and highlights the court’s increased focus on organizational controls governing AI use. Although Leiske v. Kidd concerned litigation conduct and the duties of attorneys and law firms rather than directors’ fiduciary duties or corporate AI governance, the order suggests a growing judicial focus on not only individual misuse of AI, but also on the processes, controls, and oversight surrounding how AI is deployed within an organization. That focus reflects themes discussed in our May 2026 post, which examined SDNY’s inquiry into organizational questions arising from the use of ChatGPT in government decision-making.
Strayed from the Path: Dodiya v. Franklin and the Emerging Rules of the DGCL’s Section 144 Safe Harbors
On August 26, 2026, the Court of Chancery issued Dodiya v. Franklin, C.A. No. 2025-0932-LWW (Del. Ch. Aug. 26, 2026), concluding that the “striking breakdown in corporate governance” detailed in the complaint made the “predictable path to safe harbor” under amended Section 144 of the Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL) unavailable at the pleading stage. Dodiya’s message for boards is simple: the safe harbors deliver powerful protection, particularly by virtue of the presumption of disinterestedness afforded to directors determined to be independent for listing standard purposes, but only to boards that (i) run a process that is not grossly negligent and (ii) provide materially accurate disclosure to stockholders.
When “The Devil Made Me Do It” Is Not a Defense: Lessons in AI Governance and Organizational Oversight from an SDNY Decision
As companies increasingly integrate generative and agentic AI into core business functions, a May 7, 2026 decision from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York1 highlights several fundamental guardrails for corporate legal and compliance departments to consider. Although the case arose in the context of government decision-making, the opinion carries broader implications for any entity that embeds generative AI in its processes.
Panoramic – Corporate Governance 2025
Holly Gregory and Claire Holland have authored the United States chapter of Panoramic – Corporate Governance 2025, an annual summary of key corporate governance practices in 18 jurisdictions worldwide. Topics addressed in the chapter include: sources of governance rules and practice, shareholders’ rights, duties and liability, anti-takeover devices, board structures, legal duties of the board, and disclosure and reporting requirements. Holly Gregory has served as the contributing editor since 2015.
Board Governance: Maintaining Balance in Uncertainty
Six Things to Know About Special Committees and Special Litigation Committees
Forming and operating SCs and SLCs requires careful consideration of various legal, practical, and strategic factors. Here are six key things general counsels should be aware of.
Sidley Discusses the Evolving Corporate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Landscape
Over the past few years, the legal landscape surrounding diversity, equity and inclusion (“DEI”) has undergone significant changes. The landmark SFFA v. Harvard decision prohibiting the use of race‑based considerations in college admissions has contributed to the emergence of a vocal anti-DEI movement. More recently, companies are facing challenges in light of executive orders and anti-DEI campaigns by shareholder proponents and activists that have cast doubt over the future of DEI. In order to navigate this evolving landscape, companies must understand the implications of these events and how to address them.
Action Items for U.S. Public Companies for 2025
Rapid rulemaking and aggressive enforcement by the SEC, combined with legislative, judicial, and regulatory developments, have created new requirements and expectations for U.S. public companies.
