Legal Opinion
Stotland v. GAF Corp.
Supreme Court of Delaware
Decided December 5, 1983PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Per curiam
The appellees move to dismiss this appeal for mootness. The action was filed in the Court of Chancery as a stockholders’ derivative suit, and subsequently was ordered dismissed because of the plaintiffs’ failure to comply with Chancery Rule 23.1, respecting a demand upon the directors of the corporate defendant, GAF Corporation (GAF), or otherwise to demonstrate the futility of such demand. 1 After dismissal, but before taking this appeal, one of the plaintiffs filed a written demand that the GAF board take action to enforce the company’s rights in connection with certain transactions, in-…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Zapata Corp. v. MaldonadoSupreme Court of Delaware · 1981
- Sannini v. CasscellsSupreme Court of Delaware · 1979
3Cited by24 opinions
- Spiegel v. BuntrockSupreme Court of Delaware · 1990
- Allison Ex Rel. General Motors Corp. v. General Motors Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1985
- General Motors Corp. v. New Castle CountySupreme Court of Delaware · 1997
- Flocco v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2000
- Stepak v. AddisonCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1994
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.