Legal Opinion

King v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc.

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided January 28, 2011No. 330, 2010PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JACOBS, Justice:

The sole issue on this appeal is whether a stockholder-plaintiff who has brought a stockholder’s derivative action without first prosecuting an action to inspect books and records under 8 Del. C. § 220 is, for that reason alone, legally precluded from prosecuting a later-filed Section 220 proceeding. Charles R. King (“King”), the plaintiff-below appellant, brought this Section 220 action for a court-ordered inspection of certain books and records of the corporate defendant-below, appellee VeriFone Holdings, Inc. (“VeriFone”). The Court of Chancery dismissed King’s complaint,…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Aronson v. LewisSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
  3. Brehm v. EisnerSupreme Court of Delaware · 2000
  4. Rales v. Blasband Ex Rel. Easco Hand Tools, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1993
  5. Beam Ex Rel. M. Stewart Living v. StewartSupreme Court of Delaware · 2004

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

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. In re MFW Shareholders LitigationCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2013
  2. South ex rel. Hecla Mining Co. v. BakerCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2012
  3. Pyott v. Louisiana Municipal Police Employees' Retirement SystemSupreme Court of Delaware · 2013
  4. Louisiana Municipal Police Employees' Retirement System v. PyottCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2012
  5. Espinoza v. Hewlett-Packard Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2011

40 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