Legal Opinion

Nakahara v. NS 1991 American Trust

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided March 20, 1998No. C.A. No. 15905PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CHANDLER, Chancellor.

Plaintiffs are managing trustees of a Delaware business trust seeking advance indemnification from the trust under an advancement provision in the trust’s governing instrument. The trust agrees that plaintiffs are entitled to advancement. A beneficiary of the trust’s parent trust objects to the advancement on the- grounds that the Delaware Business Trust Act does not permit business trusts to advance litigation expenses to trustees and, even so, plaintiffs have not satisfied the pre-condi-tions set forth in the business trust’s advancement provision. I find that…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Aronson v. LewisSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
  2. Moore v. SizemoreSupreme Court of Delaware · 1979
  3. Cede & Co. v. Technicolor, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1994
  4. Citadel Holding Corp. v. RovenSupreme Court of Delaware · 1992
  5. Graham v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Delaware · 1989

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Kaung v. Cole National Corp.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2005
  2. ASARCO LLC v. Americas Mining Corp.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2008
  3. Senior Tour Players v. GOLFTOWNCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2004
  4. Cargill, Inc. v. JWH Special Circumstance LLCCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2008
  5. Schoon v. Troy Corp.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 2008

22 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