In CASE 20.1 Smith v. Van Gorkom (1985) discussed in the text, plaintiff-shareholders alleged the directors were grossly negligent in failing to inform themselves adequately before making a decision about a merger. How did the court rule and why?
a. For plaintiff-shareholders, because the board failed to obtain adequate information on merger terms and therefore was not protected by the business judgment rule.
b. For directors, because the board was protected by the business judgment rule since there was no conflict of interest.
c. For the directors, but the board was not protected by the business judgment rule but rather by the business merger rule.
d. For the directors, because the board was protected by the business judgment rule since fraud could not be established.
a
You might also like to view...
Rapid prototyping refers to designing products on a computer and then producing rough models to show potential consumers for their reactions
Indicate whether the statement is true or false
The policy gap is the difference between specified delivery standards and the service provider's actual performance on these standards
Indicate whether the statement is true or false
Which of the following ratios is most useful in indicating a company's profitability?
A) Operating cash flow ratio B) Profit margin ratio C) Dividend payout ratio D) Dividend yield ratio
When referring to time, writers must use "9 o'clock" instead of "nine o'clock" for greater formality but less emphasis
Indicate whether the statement is true or false