Legal Opinion
Lewis v. Aronson
Court of Chancery of Delaware
Decided July 15, 1983PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HARTNETT, Vice Chancellor.
Defendants moved to dismiss this stockholder’s derivative suit because of the failure of the plaintiff to make a demand on the Board of Directors of the corporate defendant prior to the filing of suit and because of the failure of the plaintiff to adequately demonstrate the futility of making the demand. The motion must be denied.
I
The plaintiff, Harry Lewis, filed this stockholder’s derivative suit on behalf of the stockholders of Meyers Parking System, Inc. (“Meyers Parking”), a Delaware corporation, naming as defendants Meyers Parking and ten individuals who were…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Guth v. Loft, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1939
- Zapata Corp. v. MaldonadoSupreme Court of Delaware · 1981
- Dorothy Elfenbein v. Gulf & Western Industries, Inc., and Stelux Manufacturing Co., and Bulova Watch Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
- Lewis v. CurtisCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
- H. M. Greenspun v. Del E. Webb Corporation, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Aronson v. LewisSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
- In Re Bear Stearns Companies, Inc. Securities, Derivative, & Erisa LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2011
- Haber v. BellCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1983
- Kaufman v. BelmontCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1984
- Heine v. Streamline Foods Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2011
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.