Legal Opinion

Ritter v. Dollens

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 2006No. 94S00-0407-CQ-318PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

SHEPARD, Chief Justice.

The U.S. District Court of the Southern District of Indiana has asked us if passage of the Indiana Business Corporation Law in 1986 requires a shareholder commene-ing a derivative lawsuit to make a written demand on the corporation unless irreparable injury to the corporation would result, or if demand is still excused if it would be futile. Pursuant to Indiana Ap*572pellate Rule 64, Judge Sarah Evans Barker has certified the following question of Indiana law:

Under Indiana Code § 23-1-82-2, regarding futility, by what legal standard should a court evaluate a shareholder's…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Zapata Corp. v. MaldonadoSupreme Court of Delaware · 1981
  2. Jane Perlman v. C. Russell Feldmann, Newport Steel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
  3. Cuker v. MikalauskasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  4. Boland v. EngleCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997
  5. Wayne Pike Co. v. HammonsIndiana Supreme Court · 1891

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In Re Guidant Shareholders DerivativeIndiana Supreme Court · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API