The recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision, In re McDonald’s Corporate Stockholder Derivative Litigation is a reminder of corporate officer duties and the vital role that corporate officers play in corporate governance, at both publicly and privately held corporations. These duties stem from officers’ status as both agents and fiduciaries. For boards of directors and other officers to perform their roles effectively, it is critical for officers to understand an satisfy their duties. Failure to do so may deprive boards of directors of information they need to monitor operations, mitigate risks and establish strategy and can expose officers to personal liability.
https://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2023/06/MN-18360_Updated-Enhanced-Scrutiny-Blog-imagery_833x606_31.jpg606833Beth E. Berghttps://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngBeth E. Berg2023-06-15 07:55:222024-02-06 12:43:45Corporate Officers’ Role in Corporate Governance: What Officers Need to Know
Holly Gregory and Claire Holland have authored the United States chapter of Getting the Deal Through – Corporate Governance 2023, an annual summary of key corporate governance practices in 19 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.
https://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.png00Holly J. Gregoryhttps://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngHolly J. Gregory2023-06-12 10:12:082023-09-08 10:04:06Getting the Deal Through – Corporate Governance 2023
On June 1, 2023, the majority of an en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit found that Gap Inc.’s forum selection clause does not violate the anti-waiver provision of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) or Delaware law, entrenching its split with the Seventh Circuit’s circuit ruling on the same questions and ensuring that the enforcement of forum selection clauses across jurisdictions will remain unsettled for the foreseeable future.
https://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2023/05/MN-18360_Updated-Enhanced-Scrutiny-Blog-imagery_833x606_11.jpg606833Jaime A. Bartletthttps://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngJaime A. Bartlett2023-06-08 09:04:492024-02-06 12:42:09The Saga Continues: Part II
The Delaware Court of Chancery recently reminded litigants of the “fundamental right . . . to an open court system.” Minnie Sarwal v. Nephrosant, Inc., C.A. No. 2023-0222-BWD (Del Ch. May 11, 2023). The Court’s ruling in Sarwal, as well as another recent decision, serve as a strong reminder that litigants should not presume information will be kept confidential, no matter how sensitive it may be. If a party cannot demonstrate a particularized harm from disclosure that outweighs the public interest in accessing the information, the Court of Chancery will not permit confidential treatment.
https://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.png00Jim Ducayethttps://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngJim Ducayet2023-06-06 11:10:092023-09-08 10:05:30The Presumption of Public Access: From Internal Investigations to Arbitration Agreements, Delaware Courts Disfavor Confidentiality
Chancellor McCormick, of the Delaware Court of Chancery, recently was presented with the following question: If an indemnification provision in a purchase agreement clearly requires that the indemnifying party be permitted to participate in the defense of third party claims, is it a breach not to allow that participation? It turns out that, despite a bit of creative contractual interpretation, the answer is “yes.”
https://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.png00Jon Muenzhttps://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngJon Muenz2023-05-31 09:04:332023-09-08 10:06:05No Participation Trophy: Court of Chancery Shifts Fees For Failure To Allow Indemnifying Seller to Participate In Defense
To help navigate increasingly complex corporate governance challenges, a recent report by the National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD) Commission on The Future of the American Board highlights areas of focus for boards in 2023 and beyond.
https://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2023/05/MN-18360_Updated-Enhanced-Scrutiny-Blog-imagery_833x606_27.jpg606833Holly J. Gregoryhttps://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngHolly J. Gregory2023-05-24 09:01:062023-09-08 10:06:38Future-Proofing the Board of Directors
Earlier this month, Vice Chancellor Morgan T. Zurn of the Delaware Court of Chancery issued a decision regarding an unsettled question of Delaware corporate law: whether an uncoerced and fully informed vote of disinterested stockholders may ratify and defeat a post-close claim seeking to enjoin certain governance measures and alleged entrenchment devices negotiated by a company’s board as part of a transaction. The court concluded that such a vote, known commonly as “Corwin cleansing,” does not apply to post-close claims for injunctive relief under Unocal Corp. v. Mesa Petroleum Co. The court’s decision, at least for now, will have immediate significance for company boards and their advisors when negotiating transactions or stockholder agreements that include measures that may be characterized as defensive or entrenching existing management or directors.
https://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.png00Andrew W. Sternhttps://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngAndrew W. Stern2023-05-23 09:01:192023-09-08 10:07:15Chancery Cancels Corwin for Post-Close Claims for Injunctive Relief
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Ok
Corporate Officers’ Role in Corporate Governance: What Officers Need to Know
The recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision, In re McDonald’s Corporate Stockholder Derivative Litigation is a reminder of corporate officer duties and the vital role that corporate officers play in corporate governance, at both publicly and privately held corporations. These duties stem from officers’ status as both agents and fiduciaries. For boards of directors and other officers to perform their roles effectively, it is critical for officers to understand an satisfy their duties. Failure to do so may deprive boards of directors of information they need to monitor operations, mitigate risks and establish strategy and can expose officers to personal liability.
(more…)
Beth E. Berg
Chicago
bberg@sidley.com
Hannah Ellis
Chicago
hellis@sidley.com
Getting the Deal Through – Corporate Governance 2023
Holly Gregory and Claire Holland have authored the United States chapter of Getting the Deal Through – Corporate Governance 2023, an annual summary of key corporate governance practices in 19 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.
(more…)
Holly J. Gregory
New York
holly.gregory@sidley.com
Claire H. Holland
Chicago
cholland@sidley.com
The Saga Continues: Part II
On June 1, 2023, the majority of an en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit found that Gap Inc.’s forum selection clause does not violate the anti-waiver provision of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) or Delaware law, entrenching its split with the Seventh Circuit’s circuit ruling on the same questions and ensuring that the enforcement of forum selection clauses across jurisdictions will remain unsettled for the foreseeable future.
(more…)
Jaime A. Bartlett
San Francisco
jbartlett@sidley.com
Tyler Baylis
San Francisco
tbaylis@sidley.com
The Presumption of Public Access: From Internal Investigations to Arbitration Agreements, Delaware Courts Disfavor Confidentiality
The Delaware Court of Chancery recently reminded litigants of the “fundamental right . . . to an open court system.” Minnie Sarwal v. Nephrosant, Inc., C.A. No. 2023-0222-BWD (Del Ch. May 11, 2023). The Court’s ruling in Sarwal, as well as another recent decision, serve as a strong reminder that litigants should not presume information will be kept confidential, no matter how sensitive it may be. If a party cannot demonstrate a particularized harm from disclosure that outweighs the public interest in accessing the information, the Court of Chancery will not permit confidential treatment.
(more…)
Jim Ducayet
Chicago
jducayet@sidley.com
Caitlin Fernandez Zamora
No Participation Trophy: Court of Chancery Shifts Fees For Failure To Allow Indemnifying Seller to Participate In Defense
Chancellor McCormick, of the Delaware Court of Chancery, recently was presented with the following question: If an indemnification provision in a purchase agreement clearly requires that the indemnifying party be permitted to participate in the defense of third party claims, is it a breach not to allow that participation? It turns out that, despite a bit of creative contractual interpretation, the answer is “yes.”
(more…)
Jon Muenz
New York
jmuenz@sidley.com
Future-Proofing the Board of Directors
(more…)
Holly J. Gregory
New York
holly.gregory@sidley.com
Chancery Cancels Corwin for Post-Close Claims for Injunctive Relief
Earlier this month, Vice Chancellor Morgan T. Zurn of the Delaware Court of Chancery issued a decision regarding an unsettled question of Delaware corporate law: whether an uncoerced and fully informed vote of disinterested stockholders may ratify and defeat a post-close claim seeking to enjoin certain governance measures and alleged entrenchment devices negotiated by a company’s board as part of a transaction. The court concluded that such a vote, known commonly as “Corwin cleansing,” does not apply to post-close claims for injunctive relief under Unocal Corp. v. Mesa Petroleum Co. The court’s decision, at least for now, will have immediate significance for company boards and their advisors when negotiating transactions or stockholder agreements that include measures that may be characterized as defensive or entrenching existing management or directors.
(more…)
Andrew W. Stern
New York
astern@sidley.com
Vincent J. Margiotta
New York
vmargiotta@sidley.com
Categories
Archives
Meet the Team
Andrew W. Stern
astern@sidley.com
Charlotte K. Newell
cnewell@sidley.com
Elizabeth Y. Austin
laustin@sidley.com
Jaime A. Bartlett
jbartlett@sidley.com
Jim Ducayet
jducayet@sidley.com
Yolanda C. Garcia
ygarcia@sidley.com
James Heyworth
jheyworth@sidley.com
Alex J. Kaplan
ajkaplan@sidley.com
Jodi E. Lopez
jlopez@sidley.com
Jon Muenz
jmuenz@sidley.com
Ian M. Ross
iross@sidley.com
Hille R. Sheppard
hsheppard@sidley.com
Heather Benzmiller Sultanian
hsultanian@sidley.com
Robert S. Velevis
rvelevis@sidley.com
Robin E. Wechkin
rwechkin@sidley.com