Legal Opinion
In Re Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation
District Court, S.D. Texas
Decided March 3, 1993No. Civ. A. H-91-3142, H-91-3638 and H-91-3568PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
ROSENTHAL, District Judge.
This consolidated amended complaint alleges two claims for relief against the individual defendants, officers or members of the Board of Directors of Browning Ferris Industries (“BFI”). Plaintiffs, shareholders of BFI, allege proxy fraud under section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. sec. 78m(a) and Rule 14a-9, 17 C.F.R. § 240 (Count I), and under the disclosure requirements of Delaware law (Count II). Plaintiffs also bring a derivative shareholders’ action on behalf of BFI under Rule 23.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Cruz v. BetoSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- United States v. Crop Growers Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 1997
- United States Securities & Exchange Commission v. BrownDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- In Re Marsh & McLennan Companies, Securities LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2007
- In Re Morgan Stanley Derivative LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2008
- Hulliung v. BolenDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2008
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.