Legal Opinion
Levine v. Smith
Supreme Court of Delaware
Decided May 1, 1991PublishedCited by 199 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HORSEY, Justice:
These separate shareholder suits, consolidated on appeal, challenge once again the business judgment rule’s application to action of the General Motors Board of Directors which this Court addressed three years ago in Grobow v. Perot, Del.Supr., 539 A.2d 180 (1988) (hereinafter “Grobow /”). The appeals highlight the differing legal standards controlling shareholder standing to pursue derivative claims depending on whether the shareholder asserts a claim of demand futility or wrongful refusal of demand. In the Grobow appeal (hereinafter “Grobow II”), a derivative claim premised…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Aronson v. LewisSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
- Charles E. Egger v. Harlan C. PhillipsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
- Zapata Corp. v. MaldonadoSupreme Court of Delaware · 1981
- Grobow v. PerotSupreme Court of Delaware · 1988
- Sinclair Oil Corporation v. LevienSupreme Court of Delaware · 1971
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by199 opinions
- Brehm v. EisnerSupreme Court of Delaware · 2000
- Beam Ex Rel. M. Stewart Living v. StewartSupreme Court of Delaware · 2004
- In Re Santa Fe Pacific Corp. Shareholder LitigationSupreme Court of Delaware · 1995
- Koos v. Central Ohio Cellular, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1994
- Desert Equities, Inc. v. Morgan Stanley Leveraged Equity Fund, II, L.P.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1993
194 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.