 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled edit
It might be good to discuss Delaware's reaction to this case: which was to essentially overrule this decision by only allowing suits if the board was disloyal and only for non-monetary damages. Jesushouston 17:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with File:DelawareSupremeCourtSeal.gif edit
The image File:DelawareSupremeCourtSeal.gif is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --09:22, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Criticism edit
This article [1] says "That is a shit Wikipedia article, btw. The significance of Smith v. Van Gorkom is that it effectively made a fairness opinions a legal requirement of a public company merger. Somehow that isn’t mentioned. Someone should fix that." Justinc (talk) 09:51, 8 March 2012 (UTC)