Director and Officer Liability

Subscribe to Director and Officer Liability via RSS

One of the focal points in the scrutiny that has followed in the wake of the current social justice movement has been the question of diversity at America’s companies, including the lack of diversity on corporate boards. Among other things, a number of boards of public companies lacking Black directors have been sued in a series of shareholders derivative lawsuits alleging that the board members violated their fiduciary duties by failing to live up to state diversity objectives, as discussed most recently. Now, in the latest example of this type of litigation, a plaintiff shareholder has filed a derivative lawsuit against the board of Monster Beverage Corporation, alleging that the directors breached their fiduciary duties and deceived investors by claiming to have diversity and inclusion programs while have no Black directors on the board. A copy of the complaint can be found here.
Continue Reading Monster Beverage Hit With Latest Board Diversity Lawsuit

In yesterday’s post, I noted that earlier this week, a plaintiff shareholder had filed a board diversity lawsuit against the Gap. Turns out, that the same day yet another company was also hit with a board diversity shareholder derivative lawsuit, this time involving the board of directors and Chief Executive Officer of the medical and industrial product company Danaher Corporation. The Danaher lawsuit is in many ways substantially similar to the prior lawsuits that have been filed against companies that have no African-Americans on their boards of directors; however, the Danaher lawsuit is the first filed against a company outside California (Danaher is based in the District of Columbia), and it was filed by a different law firm than the one that had filed all of the prior board diversity suits. The complaint in the Danaher action can be found here.
Continue Reading Yet Another Board Diversity Derivative Lawsuit, This Time Against Danaher’s Board

In the latest in a series of lawsuits against high-profile companies alleging that the companies’ boards lack African-American directors, a plaintiff shareholder has filed a shareholder derivative lawsuit against the board of directors of the clothing retailer, The Gap. The lawsuit is substantially similar to the lawsuits filed by the same plaintiffs’ law firm against Oracle (here), Facebook (here), Qualcomm (here), and NortonLifeLock (here). A copy of the lawsuit against The Gap’s board can be found here.
Continue Reading The Gap Hit with Board Diversity Derivative Lawsuit

The news that McDonald’s had filed a lawsuit against its former CEO, Stephen Easterbrook, to recoup severance compensation the company had paid Easterbrook, made the front page of the Wall Street Journal. The company contends that Easterbrook had only been terminated last November “without cause” – entitling him to a full severance package – because he had lied to investigators about the nature and extent of his relationship with company employees. The lawsuit contends — based on evidence of three additional sexual relationships Easterbrook had with company employees that only came to light this summer — that Easterbrook should have been terminated for cause. As discussed below, the lawsuit raises a number of interesting issues.  A copy of the company’s August 10, 2020 filing on Form 8-K about the lawsuit can be found here, and a copy of the complaint, which was attached to the 8-K, can be found here.
Continue Reading Thinking About McDonald’s Lawsuit Against its Former CEO

Cybersecurity firm NortonLifeLock became the latest company to be hit with a shareholder derivative lawsuit alleging that, despite company statements about its  commitment to diversity and inclusion, the company’s board and senior management lacks racial diversity. The NortonLifeLock lawsuit follows after substantially similar lawsuits – filed by the same law firm – were previously filed against Oracle (about which refer here), Facebook (here), and Qualcomm (here). A copy of the August 5, 2020 lawsuit against NortonLifeLock’s board can be found here.
Continue Reading NortonLifeLock Hit with Board Diversity Derivative Suit

Brent Ashley

In a recent post (here), I reviewed the steps that well-advised companies can take in light of the current coronavirus outbreak to try to mitigate their risk of management liability claims arising out of the pandemic. In the following guest post, Brent Ashley of the Hirschler law firm takes a look at the steps corporate boards can take in light of the COVID-19 pandemic to try to insulate themselves against claims based on alleged breaches of the duty of oversight. I would like to thank Brent for allowing me to publish his article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Brent’s article.
Continue Reading Guest Post: 7 Steps for Ensuring Director Oversight During COVID-19

Although Delaware’s courts recognized a cause of action for directors’ breach of the duty of oversight in the 1996 Caremark decision, claims against directors based on alleged oversight duty breaches have long been seen as difficult to plead and prove. However, in two 2019 rulings – the Marchand v. Barnhill decision (discussed here) and the Clovis Oncology decision (discussed here) – Delaware courts allowed breach of the duty of oversight claims to proceed. Now in a more recent ruling, the Delaware Court of Chancery has allowed yet another duty of oversight claim to proceed.

As noted in a May 1, 2020 post on the Duane Morris Delaware Business Law Blog (here), the most recent Delaware duty of oversight ruling reinforces the view that “directors and officers who neglect their oversight responsibilities may be personally liable for resulting harm to the company and its stockholders.” The Delaware Court of Chancery’s April 27, 2020 decision in Hughes v. Hu can be found here.
Continue Reading Another Delaware Breach of the Duty of Oversight Case Survives Dismissal Motion

In the early stages of the coronavirus-related close-down, most colleges and universities terminated live classes, switched to online lessons, and sent their students home. In some cases, affected students have filed lawsuits against their schools, seeking to recover tuition and fees paid for classes, housing, and food. The following posts discuss the extent of the exposure that these kinds of claims represent for these institutions’ boards of directors or boards of trustees.
Continue Reading Coronavirus-Related Suits Hit Higher Ed Institutions

Many readers may have seen the news this past week that the estate of a deceased Walmart employee who had died of complications from COVID-19 has filed a Wrongful Death lawsuit against the company. According to the lawyer who filed the complaint, the lawsuit is the “first known COVID-19 wrongful death lawsuit.” Even though a Wrongful Death lawsuit is far outside this blog’s usual remit, I tracked the complaint down and read it carefully, in order to think more about possible future coronavirus blame casting that could arise in the D&O claims arena. While the wrongful death lawsuit may be the first of its type, it surely will not be the last, and its filing may foreshadow other possible claims.
Continue Reading Thinking About Coronavirus Blame and the Possible Course of D&O Claims