Legal Opinion
Desaigoudar v. Meyercord
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 28, 2003No. H023911PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
PREMO, Acting P. J.
In this shareholders’ derivative lawsuit, plaintiffs Aarathi and Chan Desaigoudar, as trustees of the Chan Desaigoudar Foundation, allege that eight directors or officers of California Micro Devices Corporation (CMD) wasted corporate assets and breached their fiduciary duties.
The superior court granted a defense motion for summary judgment on the ground that a special litigation committee appointed by the CMD board of directors made a good faith determination that it was not in the company’s best interest to prosecute the Desaigoudars’ claim. On appeal, plaintiffs…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.California Supreme Court · 2001
- Auerbach v. BennettNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Zapata Corp. v. MaldonadoSupreme Court of Delaware · 1981
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,000 Ora E. Gaines v. D. J. Haughton, Lois A. And James Fitzpatrick v. D. J. HaughtonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Gagnon Co., Inc. v. Nevada Desert InnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Knapp v. DohertyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Favila v. Katten Muchin Rosenman LLPCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- In Re UnitedHealth Group Inc. Shareholder Derivative LitigationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2008
- Patrick v. Alacer Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2008
- Rodriguez v. OtoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.