Legal Opinion

Villari v. Mozilo

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 30, 2012No. B231432PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CROSKEY, J.

Delaware’s continuous ownership rule requires a plaintiff in a shareholder derivative action to retain stock ownership for the duration of the litigation. A plaintiff who ceases to be a shareholder as a result of a merger, or for any other reason, loses standing to maintain a derivative action. The Delaware Supreme Court has stated in several opinions, however, that a former shareholder will retain standing to maintain a derivative action despite a merger if the sole purpose of the merger was to eliminate potential derivative claims. This is known as the fraud exception to…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Tooley v. Donaldson, Lufkin, & Jenrette, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2004
  2. Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Schifando v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  4. McCall v. PacifiCare of California, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Kramer v. Western Pacific Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1988

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Yun Hee So v. Sook Ja ShinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  2. Puklich v. PuklichNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2019
  3. Charter Township of Clinton Police & Fire Retirement System v. MartinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  4. Hawkins v. Taca International Airlines, S.A.California Court of Appeal · 2014
  5. Arkansas Teacher Retirement Sy v. Angelo MoziloCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013

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

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

Powered by the Exa API