Footnotes (220)



Rethinking Aronson

Andrew Lund

Villanova University School of Law

October 20, 2008

University of Pennsylvania Journal of Business Law, 2009

Shareholders who wish to sue derivatively for breach of directors' fiduciary duties face significant obstacles. Chief among these is the requirement that they demand that the corporation's board pursue the action, unless such demand would be futile. The general test in Delaware for demand futility was set forth almost twenty-five years ago in Aronson v. Lewis. The second prong of that test asks whether the board decision underlying the complaint was the subject of a "valid business judgment." When Aronson was decided, this question served as a satisfactory proxy for the principle motivating the demand futility exception - the need to restrain board authority where the board is expected to be unable to make an impartial decision. If the original decision was not the product of a valid business judgment, directors would likely face personal liability from the derivative suit.

With the almost universal adoption of exculpatory charter provisions, however, a space has opened between the spirit of Aronson and its test. Under the second prong, claims based on directors' due care breaches will not require demand despite the fact that directors have no reason to fear personal liability. Judging demand to be futile in such cases improperly undercuts board authority over corporate litigation decisions. In addition, when combined with the different test for demand futility applied in cases of board non-action, Aronson's second prong provides directors with incentives to delegate more decisionmaking authority to committees and management than they might have otherwise. Accordingly, the longstanding Aronson test should be revised.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 42

Keywords: demand, demand futility, derivative litigation, Aronson, Rales, exculpation clause

JEL Classification: g30, k22

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: October 20, 2008 ; Last revised: April 29, 2009

Suggested Citation

Lund, Andrew, Rethinking Aronson (October 20, 2008). University of Pennsylvania Journal of Business Law, 2009. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1287230

Contact Information

Andrew Lund (Contact Author)
Villanova University School of Law ( email )
299 N. Spring Mill Rd.
Villanova, PA 19085
United States
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,572
Downloads: 133
Download Rank: 164,197
Footnotes:  220