Emerald Partners v. Berlin

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that defendant directors can obtain exculpation only if they prove that their breach of duty was “exclusively attributable to a violation of the duty of care”
• holding that the plaintiff waived arguments by failing to raise them in its opening brief
• holding that in a challenge to a transaction with majority stockholder to which entire fairness applied, the court could not apply Section 102(b)(7
• holding that in challenge to transaction with majority stockholder to which entire fairness applied, court could not apply Section 102(b)(7) on motion for summary judgment because factual conflicts required a trial to determine nature of the duty breached
• holding that in challenge to transaction with majority stockholder to which entire fairness applied, court could not apply Section 102(b)(7) on motion for summary judgment because factual conflicts required a trial to determine nature of the duty breached
• holding that plaintiff waived arguments by failing to raise them in its opening brief

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).