Law Commons^™

Esg & Caremark: Shareholders Might Lack Adequate Tools To Voice Esg Concerns And To Hold Boards Of Directors Accountable For Esg Oversight, Meryl Roux Jimenez

University of Miami Business Law Review

Environmental, Social, and Government (“ESG”) practices are no longer an area that corporations can ignore. A corporation’s failure to oversee an ESG risk can lead to a reputational scandal for the company, which, ultimately, hurts shareholders. The only primary legal recourse for shareholders to hold a board of directors accountable—for breaching its fiduciary duty to oversee a risk— is to bring a Caremark action in court. While most Caremark actions have proved favorable to shareholders in the past two decades, it is an imperfect and reactive framework for ESG related claims. Corporations are pulled in two opposite directions: maximizing shareholders’ …

The Problem With The “Non-Class” Class: An Urgent Call For Improved Gatekeepers In Merger Objection Litigation, Josh Molder

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

Until recently, class actions dominated merger objection litigation. However, plaintiff’s lawyers have constructed a “non-class” class where an individual suit can benefit from the leverage of a certified class without ever meeting the stringent class certification requirements of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23. This new development has initiated a shift in merger objection litigation where plaintiffs are increasingly filing individual suits instead of class actions. However, this shift has left shareholders vulnerable to collusive settlements because plaintiff’s attorneys have significant control over these suits and a strong incentive to settle quickly for a substantial fee. Additionally, corporate defendants are …

The Rise Of Corporate Guidelines In The United States, 2005-2021: Theory And Evidence, Asaf Eckstein

Indiana Law Journal

Institutional investors are legally obliged to be faithful stewards of their portfolio companies. Yet, the conventional wisdom among commentators is that institutional investors have failed to perform this obligation because they are not incentivized to make adequate investments in corporate governance. This Article contends that this criticism is based on an incomplete analysis that misses a critical aspect of the operation of institutional investors. The critics focus exclusively on institutional investors’ efforts in actively engaging with the managements of their portfolio companies. They ignore, however, an important passive governance tool that institutional investors routinely use: corporate guidelines. Corporate guidelines are …

Who Makes Esg? Understanding Stakeholders In The Esg Debate, Matthew Diller, Stephanie Betts, Lorenzo Corte, David M. Silk, Scott V. Simpson, Lisa M. Fairfax, Carmen X. W. Lu, David H. Webber, Leo E. Strine, Jr., Sean J. Griffith

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents.

Shareholder Meetings And Freedom Rides: The Story Of Peck V. Greyhound, Harwell Wells

Seattle University Law Review

In 1947, civil rights pioneers James Peck and Bayard Rustin, members of the radical religious group, the Fellowship of Reconciliation, and its offshoot, the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), prepared to embark on the Journey of Reconciliation, an interracial protest against segregated busing in the American South. But first, they did something else radical: they bought shares in a corporation. A year later, after their travels in the South had led to terror, death threats, beatings, and in Rustin’s case, a term on a chain gang, they brought their civil rights activism to a new site of protest—the shareholder meeting …

The Independent Board As Shield, Gregory H. Shill

Washington and Lee Law Review

The fiduciary duty of loyalty bars CEOs and other executives from managing companies for personal gain. In the modern public corporation, this restriction is reinforced by a pair of institutions: the independent board of directors and the business judgment rule. In isolation, each structure arguably promotes manager fidelity to shareholder interests—but together, they enable manager prioritization. This marks a particularly striking turn for the independent board. Its origin story and raison d’être lie in protecting shareholders from opportunism by managers, but it functions as a shield for managers instead.

Numerous defects in the design and practice of the independent board …

A New Urban Front For Shareholder Primacy, Anne Choike

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

The hundredth anniversary of Dodge v. Ford marks an occasion to reflect upon what, if anything, has changed about shareholder primacy in a century. Seizing this opportunity, in this Article I analyze new local laws and ordinances that promote stakeholder governance and engagement, which seek to protect the interests of non-shareholder constituencies such as workers, the environment, and the communities in which corporations operate, among others. In doing so, I argue that such local laws meaningfully differ from traditional stakeholder protections, most significantly in the way that they weaken managerial accountability to shareholders. The emergence of these city laws challenges …

Externalities And The Common Owner, Madison Condon

Washington Law Review

Due to the embrace of modern portfolio theory, most of the stock market is controlled by institutional investors holding broadly diversified economy-mirroring portfolios. Recent scholarship has revealed the anti-competitive incentives that arise when a firm’s largest shareholders own similarly sized stakes in the firm’s industry competitors. This Article expands the consideration of the effects of common ownership from the industry level to the market portfolio level and argues that diversified investors should rationally be motivated to internalize intra-portfolio negative externalities. This portfolio perspective can explain the increasing climate change related activism of institutional investors, who have applied coordinated shareholder power …

Should Shareholders Be Rewarded For Loyalty? European Experiments On The Wedge Between Tenured Voting And Takeover Law, Chiara Mosca

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

Corporate law reveals its democratic background when it comes to the general meetings of shareholders, finding, on both sides of the Atlantic, its most tangible expression in the “one share, one vote” principle. While, in the political landscape, the “one person, one vote” standard is absolute dogma and weighting votes according to people’s preferences and interests has never proved feasible, in the corporate scenario the one share, one vote principle is constantly challenged by the incentives of companies and their shareholders to shape corporate rights according to specific needs. In this respect, some legislators (specifically in France and Italy) have …

The Modern Corporation And Private Property Revisited: Gardiner Means And The Administered Price, William W. Bratton

Seattle University Law Review

This essay casts additional light on The Modern Corporation’s corporatist precincts, shifting attention to the book’s junior coauthor, Gardiner C. Means. Means is accurately remembered as the generator of Book I’s statistical showings—the description of deepening corporate concentration and widening separation of ownership and control. He is otherwise more notable for his absence than his presence in today’s discussions of The Modern Corporation. This essay fills this gap, describing the junior coauthor’s central concern—a theory of administered prices set out in a Ph.D. dissertation Means submitted to the Harvard economics department after the book’s publication.

The Elephant In The Room: Helping Delaware Courts Develop Law To End Systemic Short-Term Bias In Corporate Decision-Making, Kenneth Mcneil, Keith Johnson

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

Short-termism in corporate decision-making is as problematic for long-term investors as relying on a three-mile radar on a supertanker. It is totally inadequate for handling the long-term risks and opportunities faced by the modern corporation. Yet recent empirical research shows that up to 85% of the S&P 1500 have no long-term planning. This is costing pension funds and other long-term investors dearly. For instance, the small minority of companies that do long-term planning and risk management had a long-term profitability that was 81% higher than their peers during the 2001–2014 period—with less stock volatility that costs investors dearly as well. …

Proxy Access Voting: Evaluating Proxy Access And The Recent Phenomenon Of Corporations Adopting Shareholder Protective Policies, Danielle Vukovich

San Diego International Law Journal

Shareholders hold a financial stake in a corporation, and therefore are often viewed as owners of the corporation and believed to be in control for all corporate actions. However, their powers are circumscribed. Board of directors committees nominate directors to serve the corporation and these directors have the power to select the corporation’s officers. The committees provide shareholders a slate of proposed directors that are voted on and approved at the annual shareholder meeting. Shareholders may also propose their own slate of directors, but this typically requires a proxy contest, which can be expensive due to the costs both associated …

Enforcing The Bargain V. Materiality Requirement: The Future Of Disclosure-Only Settlements Post-Trulia, Hao Jiang

Pace Law Review

In In re Trulia, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, the Delaware Court of Chancery broke away from its tradition of routinely approving disclosure-only settlements and required disclosures to be material in order to cure the conflict of interest between plaintiff’s counsel and the plaintiff class. I argue that fairness of settlement is the only standard in approving class action settlements and fairness will not be achieved by requiring materiality. Shareholders are legally entitled to all material information, as the board’s fiduciary duty dictates. Thus, material disclosures are enforcement of a legal duty that is no consideration for the release of shareholder claims. …

Do Institutional Owners Monitor? Evidence From Voting On Connected Transaction Proposals In Hong Kong-Listed Companies, Félix E. Mezzanotte, Simon Fung

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

The conventional view in Hong Kong has been that institutional owners tend to be passive owners and that they do little to monitor the companies’ management. We investigated whether the presence of institutional owners in Hong Kong-listed companies was associated with greater monitoring of management through dissent voting by hand-collecting information for a sample (n= 96) of connected transaction proposals (“CT proposals”) and of their voting outcomes, as announced in the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong during the period from 2012–14. Our study shows that voting approval rates on CT proposals were lower (i.e. greater dissent voting) when institutional owners …

Theories And Solutions On Wolf Pack Activism, Kimberly Goldman

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

Section I will describe the key players involved in wolf pack activism and their conflicting motives, including both the members of wolf packs and those affected by them. Given that not all shareholders have common interests, this will include an analysis of the motives of various types of shareholders and an analysis of how these diverse motives may affect the wealth sustainability of companies. Section II will explain the phenomenon of wolf packs in corporate governance by describing the circumstances that lead to their formation and the various regulations (or lack thereof) pertaining to them. Section III will describe divergent …

The Shifting Tides Of Merger Litigation, Matthew D. Cain, Jill Fisch, Steven Davidoff Solomon, Randall S. Thomas

Vanderbilt Law Review

In 2015, Delaware made several important changes to its laws concerning merger litigation. These changes, which were made in response to a perception that levels of merger litigation were too high and that a substantial proportion of merger cases were not providing value, raised the bar, making it more difficult for plaintiffs to win a lawsuit challenging a merger and more difficult for plaintiffs' counsel to collect a fee award. We study what has happened in the courts in response to these changes. We find that the initial effect of the changes has been to decrease the volume of merger …

Guardians Of The Galaxy: How Shareholder Lawyers Won Big For Their Clients And Vindicated The Integrity Of Our Economy, Daniel J. Morrissey

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

Securities class actions are the most economically significant form of litigation. Highly skilled lawyers expend huge sums and relentless efforts in these matters but because of the costs involved and the potential for enormous liability very few of them ever make it to trial. This Article is the story of one that did, a mammoth fraud where a jury returned a $1.5 billion verdict that, with interest, increased to almost $2.5 billion by the time the case reached the appellate court.

There the Court upheld the shareholders’ theory that their damages could be measured by the excessive amounts they had …

Who Speaks The Culture Of The Corporation?, Gwendolyn Gordon

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

Recent cases – Burwell v Hobby Lobby Stores and Citizens United chief among them – evince a new understanding of the nature of the corporation and its place in society. Whether a corporation has rights – such as those of religious exercise – is not, however, just a question of legal interpretation. To answer this question requires a theory of group or cultural identity, that is, a theory of how a group may have “culture” separate and apart from those of the individuals that comprise it. And such a theory must address how to understand the meaning of culture when …

Agency Theory As Prophecy: How Boards, Analysts, And Fund Managers Perform Their Roles, Jiwook Jung, Frank Dobbin

Seattle University Law Review

In 1976, Michael Jensen and William Meckling published a paper reintroducing agency theory that explained how the modern corporation is structured to serve dispersed shareholders. They purported to describe the world as it exists but, in fact, they described a utopia, and their piece was read as a blueprint for that utopia. We take a page from the sociology of knowledge to argue that, in the modern world, economic theories function as prescriptions for behavior as much as they function as descriptions. Economists and management theorists often act as prophets rather than scientists, describing the world not as it is, …

Dual-Class Capital Structures: A Legal, Theoretical & Empirical Buy-Side Analysis, Christopher C. Mckinnon

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

“The advantage of a dual-class share structure is that it protects entrepreneurial management from the demands of ordinary shareholders. The disadvantage of a dual-class share structure is that it protects entrepreneurial management from the demands of shareholders.” Issuing dual classes of stock has become hotly debated since two major events transpired in 2014: (1) Facebook acquired WhatsApp for $19 billion and (2) Alibaba chose to list its shares on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) instead of the Hong Kong Exchange. Because dual-class managers, like those at Facebook and Alibaba, retain a controlling voting block, their decisions are immune from …

Making Corporate Law More Communitarian: A Proposed Response To The Roberts Court's Personification Of Corporations, Robert M. Ackerman, Lance Cole

Brooklyn Law Review

Both Citizens United and Hobby Lobby are notable for the Roberts Court’s personification of the corporation. In Citizens United, the United States Supreme Court expanded corporate speech rights in a political context; in Hobby Lobby, it accorded religious rights to corporations in an unprecedented manner. This article explains how the Court’s expansion of corporate personification has ignored both traditional corporate law doctrine regarding shareholder primacy and the fundamental distinction in corporate law between the corporate entity and the shareholders who control it.

The article takes a communitarian approach to corporate law analysis, recognizing that corporations play useful roles …

Disciplining Corporate Boards And Debtholders Through Targeted Proxy Access, Michelle M. Harner

Indiana Law Journal

Corporate directors committed to a failed business strategy or unduly influenced by the company’s debtholders need a dissenting voice—they need shareholder nominees on the board. This Article examines the biases, conflicts, and external factors that impact board decisions, particularly when a company faces financial distress. It challenges the conventional wisdom that debt disciplines management, and it sug-gests that, in certain circumstances, the company would benefit from having the shareholders’ perspective more actively represented on the board. To that end, the Article proposes a bylaw that would give shareholders the ability to nominate direc-tors upon the occurrence of predefined events. Such …

The New Governance And The Challenge Of Litigation Bylaws, Jill E. Fisch

Brooklyn Law Review

Corporate governance mechanisms designed to ensure that managers act in shareholders’ interest have evolved dramatically over the past 40 years. “Old governance” mechanisms such as independent directors and performance-based executive compensation have been supplemented by innovations that give shareholders greater input into both the selection of directors and ongoing operational decisions. Issuer boards have responded with tools to limit the exercise of shareholder power both procedurally and substantively. This article terms the adoption and use of these tools, which generally take the form of structural provisions in the corporate charter or bylaws, the “new governance.”

Delaware law has largely taken …

Empowering Shareholders, Or Overburdening Companies? Analyzing The Potential Use Of Instant Runoff Voting In Corporate Elections, G. Scott Edwards

Vanderbilt Law Review

Although hotly debated today, one of the prevailing theories in the mind of the public as to why the shareholders of a corporation possess the right to vote in corporate elections is the fact that shareholders "own" the corporation. Even though one academic has written that this theory is the "worst" argument for shareholder primacy, the notion that shareholders should vote in corporations because the corporation "belongs" to them is strongly entrenched in the minds of the general public; in fact, this theory of shareholder primacy often creeps into judicial opinions, showing that even judges are influenced by the theory. …

Lessons From Institutional Shareholder Services: Governing Benefit Corporations' Third-Party Standard, Tammi S. Etheridge

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

Almost one hundred years ago, Henry Ford, as CEO of the Ford Motor Company, announced a plan to cease payment of special dividends to shareholders. Instead, the company would reinvest its profits to employ more workers and build more factories. Investing in new workers and factories would cut the cost of cars and make them affordable to more people. Ford publicly declared that his “ambition [was] to employ still more men, to spread the benefits of this industrial system to the greatest possible number, to help them build up their lives and their homes. To do this we are putting …

The Business Purpose Doctrine In Corporate Divisions, Stephen Rigsby

Akron Law Review

The corporate division, however, lends itself to schemes for avoidance of tax. These schemes are attempts to convert ordinary income into income taxable at capital gains rates. An elaborate statutory mechanism has been created to prevent this conversion. In addition, the courts have created judicial doctrines which sometimes work by adding to the statutory framework and sometimes overlap. The resulting confusion of statute and judicial doctrine is the subject of this article. The investigation will focus on that part of the statute known as the device clause and its interaction with the judicial doctrines which together are known as the …

Beyond Crosby V. Beam: Ohio Courts Extend Protection Of Minority Stockholders Of Close Corporations, Kathleen L. Kuhlman

Akron Law Review

This Comment explores the possible ramifications of viewing working minority shareholders as term employees on both close corporation law and at-will-employment law in Ohio. Part I discusses the background and emergence of the heightened fiduciary duty owed by the majority stockholders to the minority stockholders in closely held corporations and the resultant protection of the minority. Part II discusses the current standing of the employment at-will doctrine and what protections exist for at-will employees in Ohio. Part III examines recent Ohio case law that compares close corporation employment with at-will-employment and analyzes the courts' reasoning behind creating a new exception …

Does Corporate Law Matter? Legal Capital Restrictions On Stock Distributions, Craig A. Peterson, Norman W. Hawker

Akron Law Review

This paper consists of five sections, including this introduction. The background section of this article consists of several parts. First, we provide an historical overview of the legal capital doctrines restricting dividends. Second, we briefly summarize and illustrate six basic types of state statutory restrictions on dividends and other distributions to shareholders. Third, we examine the criticisms of legal capital that has led many states to abandon the use of concepts like stated capital and surplus to restrict financial distributions to shareholders. Fourth, a discussion of the generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP") and mechanics of legal capital and stock distributions …

The New York Llc Act At Twenty: Is Piercing Still “Enveloped In The Midst Of Metaphor”?, Miriam R. Albert

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.