An argument before the Delaware Supreme Court got technical on Wednesday when attorneys disagreed on when corporate law allows a vote by usually non-voting Fox Corp. and Snap Inc. shareholders.

Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann partner Edward Timlin argued for the shareholders that the Court of Chancery should have seen differences between the cases on appeal and those in the past that also brought up DGCL Section 242(b)(2), while Brad Sorrels, a partner at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, said shareholder powers apply the same way in each of those cases.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]