Standards of Conduct and Standards of Review in Corporate Law: The Need for Closer Alignment

22 Pages Posted: 27 Oct 2016

See all articles by Gregory S. Crespi

Gregory S. Crespi

Southern Methodist University - Dedman School of Law

Date Written: 2004

Abstract

This article examines the arguments in support of maintaining a divergence in duty of care law between the articulated negligence standard of conduct and the gross negligence standard of review, with particular emphasis on their application to the corporate fiduciary duty of care context. The author provides a detailed discussion of the arguments presented by Meir Dan-Cohen, while also focusing on articles by Richard Singer, David Phillips, and Melvin Eisenberg. After assessing the existing scholarship justifying divergent standards in the context of corporate law, the author concludes that a single, clearly articulated standard which both defines the scope of permissible conduct for each different context in which duty of care issues arise and guides judicial application of that standard is preferable to the current conflation of legal standards.

Keywords: corporate law, duty of care law, corporate fiduciary duty of care, standards of conduct, standards of review

Suggested Citation

Crespi, Gregory S., Standards of Conduct and Standards of Review in Corporate Law: The Need for Closer Alignment (2004). Nebraska Law Review, Vol. 82, No. 3, 2004, SMU Dedman School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 331, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2859602

Gregory S. Crespi (Contact Author)

Southern Methodist University - Dedman School of Law ( email )

P.O. Box 750116
Dallas, TX 75275
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
29
Abstract Views
366
PlumX Metrics