Weiss v. Swanson

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that similar questions of fact were “unsuitable for determination on a motion to dismiss”
• observing that “even if the defendants do not exercise any [of the challenged] options at all, the court may still be able to fashion an appropriate remedy, such as repricing or rescinding the options”
• finding that the well-pleaded allegations in the complaint support inferences that the directors “in violation of their fiduciary duties, intended to circumvent the restrictions found in the plan” and make grants that violated the option plan
• rejecting argument that stockholders were on inqui ry notice when identifying the alleged wrongdoing would have required culling through and comparing numerous publicly available documents
• excusing demand for lack of board disinterestedness where “all five directors to consider demand received at least some of the challenged option grants”
• “Nothing suggests that the defendants are prevented from exercising their options once they fully vest.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).