Villari v. Mozilo
California Court of Appeal
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
- Tooley v. Donaldson, Lufkin, & Jenrette, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2004
- Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Schifando v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- McCall v. PacifiCare of California, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
- Kramer v. Western Pacific Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1988
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Yun Hee So v. Sook Ja ShinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Puklich v. PuklichNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2019
- Charter Township of Clinton Police & Fire Retirement System v. MartinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Hawkins v. Taca International Airlines, S.A.California Court of Appeal · 2014
- Arkansas Teacher Retirement Sy v. Angelo MoziloCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.