Gries Sports Enterprises, Inc. v. Cleveland Browns Football Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
1DissentWright, J.
I concur in Justice Holmes’ dissent, but must add a number of additional observations. I concur in the syllabus law of this case but I feel that the majority’s misapplication of the law to the facts is a travesty. I am troubled by the prospect of serious damage to the fabric of corporate law which will surely result from the majority’s opinion. Even a casual observer is aware of the growing crisis facing corporations in recruiting capable women and men to manage corporate affairs. The majority’s decision will exacerbate this problem.
I
The Delaware business judgment rule provides that a board…
Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Aronson v. LewisSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
- Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1986
- Sinclair Oil Corporation v. LevienSupreme Court of Delaware · 1971
- Pogostin v. RiceSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
- Blish v. Thompson Automatic Arms Corp.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1948
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.