Legal Opinion
White v. Panic
Supreme Court of Delaware
Decided October 3, 2001No. 66,2000PublishedCited by 197 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
YEASEY, Chief Justice:
In this appeal, we consider whether a complaint in a derivative action presents sufficient particularized factual allegations to create a reasonable doubt that the director defendants were disinterested and independent or that their conduct'was protected by the business judgment rule. The complaint alleges, based almost entirely on facts derived from an investigative report in a news magazine, that the board of directors affirmatively refused to take any measures to stop or sanction sexual misconduct by a corporate officer that allegedly subjected the corporation to…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Aronson v. LewisSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
- Brehm v. EisnerSupreme Court of Delaware · 2000
- Rales v. Blasband Ex Rel. Easco Hand Tools, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1993
- In Re Caremark International Inc. Derivative LitigationCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1996
- In Re Santa Fe Pacific Corp. Shareholder LitigationSupreme Court of Delaware · 1995
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by197 opinions
- Tooley v. Donaldson, Lufkin, & Jenrette, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2004
- Beam Ex Rel. M. Stewart Living v. StewartSupreme Court of Delaware · 2004
- Dunlap v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2005
- In Re Citigroup Inc. Shareholder Derivative LitigationCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2009
- F5 Capital v. PappasCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2017
192 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.