Search for: "Barnhill v. State" Results 41 - 60 of 76
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Nov 2023, 7:06 am by Kevin LaCroix
Barnhill, Delaware’s courts have proven to be more receptive to Caremark claims than in the past. [read post]
14 Jun 2020, 9:14 am by Kevin LaCroix
Barnhill, in which the court held that the plaintiff had sufficiently stated a Caremark claim against the board of an ice cream manufacturer, Blue Bell Creamery, that had suffered a listeria outbreak leading to three deaths. [read post]
6 Feb 2023, 9:01 pm by renholding
The court stated that it did not need to decide whether liability existed under the prong 1 claim to dispose of the motion to dismiss, but noted that a report prepared by external counsel indicated that the company had a “woefully inadequate compliance system. [read post]
30 Nov 2021, 1:22 pm by Kevin LaCroix
Indeed, at the time of the Delaware Supreme Court’s 2019 landmark Marchand v. [read post]
23 Mar 2020, 4:21 pm by Kandace Watson
Barnhill, 212 A.2d 805, 808 (Del. 2019). [2] See, e.g., In re Caremark Int’l Inc. [read post]
8 Oct 2019, 3:05 am by Liz Dunshee
” VC Slights cited the Delaware Supreme Court’s recent decision in Marchand v. [read post]
12 Jul 2019, 6:17 am
., on Friday, July 5, 2019 Tags: Boards of Directors, Controlling shareholders, Dual-class stock, ESG, Institutional Investors, Lyft, Shareholder voting, Uber Director Independence and Oversight Obligation in Marchand v. [read post]
7 Oct 2021, 2:08 pm by Kevin LaCroix
”   The allegations in the plaintiff’s complaint, Vice Chancellor Will said, “do not meet the high bar required to state a Caremark claim. [read post]
5 Jan 2020, 2:52 pm by Kevin LaCroix
Supreme Court’s March 2018 entry of its opinion in Cyan, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Jan 2020, 2:52 pm by Kevin LaCroix
Supreme Court’s March 2018 entry of its opinion in Cyan, Inc. v. [read post]