Legal Opinion
Brautigam v. Blankfein
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 26, 2014No. 13 Civ. 0760 (PAC)PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION & ORDER
Honorable PAUL A. CROTTY, District Judge.
Plaintiff Michael Brautigam (“Brauti-gam”) brings this shareholder derivative action on behalf of The Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (“Goldman”) to redress injuries *397as a result of alleged breaches of fiduciary-duty by the seven individual defendants, Lloyd Blankfein, Gary D. Cohn, David Vin-iar, Claes Dahlback, Stephen Friedman, William W. George, and James A. Johnson (collectively, the “Individual Defendants”), all members of Goldman’s Board of Directors. Goldman is named as a nominal defendant, solely in its derivative capacity.
The Complaint…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Commissioner v. SunnenSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Aronson v. LewisSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. First Jersey Securities, Inc. And Robert E. BrennanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1996
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Schwartz v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A.District Court, S.D. New York · 2016
- Brautigam v. DahlbackCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2015
- Laborers' District Council Construction Industry Pension Fund v. Robert BensoussanCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2016
- Michael G. Brautigam, An individual v. Claes Dahlback, Stephen FriedmanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2015