Legal Opinion
Hill v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 19, 2008No. B194463PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MALLANO, J. *
In this nationwide class action, 50 million present and former policyholders of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm) contend that during the class period, 1983 to 1998, State Farm breached a duty to pay billions of dollars in dividends and, as a result, created an excessive surplus.
State Farm moved for summary judgment based on the business judgment rule, asserting that the board of directors (Board) had made its financial decisions on an informed basis, in good faith, and with the honest belief that it was acting in the company’s best interests.…
2Cases cited88 opinions
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.California Supreme Court · 2001
- Aronson v. LewisSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
- Brehm v. EisnerSupreme Court of Delaware · 2000
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,860 Athalie Doris Joy v. Nelson L. North, Nelson L. NorthCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,959 Frank Lanza, Jr. v. Drexel & Co., Theodore J. Kircher and Christie F. VitoloCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1973
83 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Gerritsen v. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2015
- Scheenstra v. California Dairies, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2013
- Babbitt Municipalities, Inc. v. Health Care Service Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2016
- Angela Sudholt v. Country Mutual Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2023
- Babbitt Municipalities, Inc. v. Health Care Service Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2016
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.