Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Brian Lutz, left, and Colin Davis, right, of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher. Courtesy photos Brian Lutz, left, and Colin Davis, right, of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. Courtesy photos

Vice Chancellor Morgan T. Zurn’s recent decision in Rudd v. Brown reaffirms longstanding Delaware law protecting director decision-making in M&A transactions, even where Revlon duties apply and an activist has threatened the board members with a proxy campaign. The decision offers useful guidance to directors and senior officers and their advisors in a sales processes precipitated by activist interest, and reassurance that complaints based on unsubstantiated allegations of director or officer conflicts will not get past the pleadings phase.

This premium content is locked for
Delaware Business Court Insider subscribers only.

Already have an account?
Interested in customizing your subscription with Law.com access?
Contact our Sales Professionals at 1-855-808-4530 or send an email
to [email protected] to learn more.

Law Firms Mentioned


Antitrust BasicsBook

A book that anticipates virtually every antitrust legal issue you can expect to face, including: horizontal and vertical restraints; joint ventures; private treble damag...

Get More Information

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.