Grobow v. Perot

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that inquiry into a director’s self-dealing was a threshold requirement
• stating that \con-clusionary allegations of fact or law not supported by allegations of specific fact may not be taken as true\
• stating that the court need not accept “inferences nor conclusions of fact unsupported by allegations of specific facts”
• stating that “conclusionary allegations of fact or law not supported by allegations of specific fact may not be taken as true” and that the court “need not . . . draw all inferences from [the allegations] in plaintiffs’ favor unless they are reasonable inferences.”
• noting the link between the demand requirement and the need for discovery
• analyzing disinterestedness of directors where the challenged transaction was a repurchase agreement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).