Blog Posts Tagged With Director Matters

Subscribe to Director Matters RSS Feed

California Enacts Law Requiring Public Company Boards to Include Women

As our client memo explains, yesterday the governor of California signed a bill that requires public companies with executive offices in the state to include a specific number of women on their boards of directors.

Governor Brown’s statement acknowledges that “serious legal concerns” have been raised about the bill, and that “flaws” in the bill may “prove fatal to its ultimate implementation.”  However, he believes that “recent events in Washington D.C. [and] beyond” make it “crystal clear that many are not getting the message.”

His letter was copied to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee.
Continue Reading

Mr. Clayton Goes to Washington

SEC Chair nominee Jay Clayton’s March 23rd hearing before the Senate Banking Committee covered much of the expected ground. In a series of responses designed to avoid controversy, Clayton repeatedly returned to the three core mandates of the SEC – capital formation, investor protection and efficient markets – as touchstones for his future leadership of the Commission, should he be confirmed. Beyond these general areas, Clayton offered few specifics or signals as to how he might steer the Commission during his term as Chair. He did, however, discuss concerns about growing companies finding the U.S. public markets unattractive due to the burdens of being a public company.
Continue Reading

Delaware Supreme Court Finds Relationships Taint Director Independence, Promotes Internet Searches

Recently, the Delaware Supreme Court reversed the Court of Chancery in Sandys v. Pincus on findings of director independence at Zynga.  The Court of Chancery had dismissed the suit for failure to make pre-suit demand on the board or alleging that demand would have been futile, but the Delaware Supreme Court found that the plaintiff had created a reasonable doubt that the board could have properly exercised independent, disinterested business judgment in responding to a demand.  If director independence is compromised, then demand is excused.  

The plaintiff had brought suit for breach of fiduciary duties after the board exempted several insiders, both top managers and directors, from its insider trading policy. 
Continue Reading

LexBlog