Legal Opinion · Dissent

Williams v. Geier

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided January 23, 1996No. 380, 1994Published

1Dissent

HARTNETT, Justice, and HORSEY, Justice (Retired),

dissenting:

We respectfully dissent. The question is what is the appropriate standard of review to be employed by the Court of Chancery in reviewing the Milacron Recapitalization Plan that was approved by a vote of the shareholders pursuant to 8 Del.C. § 242, the effect j; of which will inevitably entrench the majority; stockholders, to the ultimate detriment of the minority stockholders who did not approve the Plan. The members of the Geier Family Group, the intended and acknowledged beneficiaries of the Plan, “own or control in excess of 50%…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Aronson v. LewisSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
  2. Weinberger v. UOP, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1983
  3. Ebersole v. LowengrubSupreme Court of Delaware · 1962
  4. Merrill v. Crothall-American, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1992
  5. Unocal Corp. v. Mesa Petroleum Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1985

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API